Posts Tagged ‘ Andre Bauer ’

The State of the States: A Look at the Governors’ Races

Tuesday, July 6th, 2010
Ed Kilgore



Ed Kilgore is a PPI senior fellow, as well as managing editor of The Democratic Strategist, an online forum.

by Ed Kilgore

Having looked at the overall landscape of House and Senate elections recently, it’s probably time for another overview of gubernatorial contests, which will have a bearing not only on state policies but on the upcoming decennial round of redistricting.

There are 37 governorships up for grabs in November, including 19 held by Democrats and 18 by Republicans, which closely reflects the narrow 26-24 Democratic advantage in gubernatorial offices overall. How many of these races are competitive? Well, according to the (subscription-only) Cook Political Report’s Jennifer Duffy, 18 of them, or nearly half, are toss-ups, including eight now held by Democrats and ten by Republicans. Add in eight more that are rated as leaning in one direction or another, and that makes an amazing 26 competitive gubernatorial races, and a range of possible outcomes that’s all over the lot, and won’t necessarily reflect the congressional results. For one thing, even if you concede a Republican “tide” this year, the competitive races are largely in states carried by Barack Obama in 2008: that includes 12 of the 14 currently held by Democrats, and 8 of the 12 currently held by Republicans.

There are races all over the country where late primaries and/or competitive dynamics could change. Fully 21 states with gubernatorial races haven’t yet held primaries (counting Alabama, with a Republican runoff next week), including 18 now rated as competitive. And most states are experiencing deep fiscal problems that cut in all sorts of different directions; it’s not automatically clear in many places whether frightening budget shortfalls will benefit Republicans who are talking about cutting back government or Democrats who are resisting new tax cuts and fighting unpopular teacher layoffs and service reductions. And thanks to term limits, retirements, and primary outcomes, the impact of incumbency is also more limited than you might think: only two of the 12 vulnerable Republican seats (Arizona and Texas), and five of the 14 vulnerable Democratic seats (Illinois, Iowa, Massachusetts, Maryland and Ohio) will have an incumbent on the ballot in November. Making things even more confusing, a significant number of former governors are running as non-incumbents this year, including Democrats Jerry Brown of California, Roy Barnes of Georgia and John Kitzhaber of Oregon, and Republicans Terry Branstad of Iowa and Bobby Ehrlich of Maryland.

I’ll be doing a separate memo focusing on redistricting later on, but it’s worth noting that gubernatorial contests could have a huge impact on that process. For example, there are five states certain to gain congressional seats where Republicans currently control the governorship and both chambers of the state legislature: Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Texas and Utah. The first four of those states have competitive governor’s races where a Democratic victory could mess up Republican “trifecta” control just in time for redistricting. New York, Ohio and Pennsylvania, all of which will lose congressional seats, also have very close partisan balances in the state legislature, and Ohio and Pennsylvania have competitive governor’s races. It’s kind of like three-dimensional chess, and well worth watching as we approach November.

Poll Watch

It’s been a quiet week on the polling front. New Rasmussen surveys of the gubernatorial races in Ohio and Pennsylvania show competitive races with GOPers out in front. In Ohio, which has been a very close contest, the poll gives Republican John Kasich a 47-40 lead over incumbent Ted Strickland, his biggest lead in any published poll since a Rasmussen survey in March. In Pennsylvania, however, Rasmussen shows Republican Tom Corbett’s lead over Democrat Dan Onorato dropping from 16 points (49-33) to ten points (49-39) since early June; the 10-point margin is also what PPP reported in its latest Pennsylvania poll.

Meanwhile, in Georgoa, whose primary is on July 20, Insider Advantage has a new poll of the Republican gubernatorial race showing long-time front-runner John Oxendine falling into a tie with Karen Handel at 18 percent, with Nathan Deal at 12 percent. This is a bit counter-intuitive since Oxendine and a fourth candidate, Eric Johnson, have recently been dominating the airwaves with ads, though at Iowa’s Southern Political Report site, John Tures attributes a purported Handel “surge” to her recent endorsement by Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer, “the next Sarah Palin.” (I have a separate post at FiveThirtyEight examining Brewer’s new national influence.) It’s probably worth noting that shortly before South Carolina’s June 8 primary, Iowa showed Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer headed for a runoff with Nikki Haley; he instead finished a dismal fourth. We’ll see if the firm has got a better “Handel” on Republican sentiment in Georgia.

Ed Kilgore’s PPI Political Memo runs every Tuesday and Friday.

SC, Utah Runoffs Highlight Tuesday Primaries

Tuesday, June 22nd, 2010
Ed Kilgore



Ed Kilgore is a PPI senior fellow, as well as managing editor of The Democratic Strategist, an online forum.

by Ed Kilgore

It’s primary day in Utah, with statewide primary runoffs on tap in North and South Carolina.

Taking these states in reverse order: South Carolina is almost certain to produce the bulk of national political headlines tonight, with the made-for-TV saga of Republican gubernatorial candidate (and certain boffo winner tonight) Nikki Haley front-and-center. In case you have somehow missed it, Haley is the very, very conservative state legislator who began the campaign as the underfunded protégé of disgraced “conservative reformer” Mark Sanford, and then vaulted into contention just as one and then two South Carolina Republican political operatives went public with allegations that they’d had illicit sex with the candidate.

It’s sometimes difficult to separate cause and effect in political developments, but it’s reasonably clear that the poorly documented sexual allegations against Haley, compounded more recently by crude attacks on her ethnicity (she’s second-generation Indian-American) and religion (she’s an adult convert to evangelical Protestantism from her family’s Sikh tradition), have immeasurably helped her campaign while reducing her once-powerful gubernatorial rivals to bystanders if not presumed accomplices in smears against her. Haley nearly won the nomination without a runoff, and was also endorsed by third-place finisher Attorney General Henry McMaster. Her opponent, Rep. Gresham Barrett, won the dubious prize of an endorsement from last-place primary finisher Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer, and also managed to outspend Haley in the brief runoff campaign. But that matters little in a race driven by scandal-fed free media, and the only question is how high her margin will rise, and how well she wears on voters in a long general election campaign against Democrat Vincent Sheheen.

Those who want to boost the GOP as a party that presents diverse candidates proclaiming a single rigid conservative message will be hoping against hope that another South Carolina runoff, in the Low Country 1st congressional district, produces a win for state representative Tim Scott. Scott, who like Haley claims the “true conservative” mantle (and has both a Sarah Palin endorsement and Club for Growth backing), is African-American, and in a coincidence that could have been made in Hollywood, his runoff opponent is none other than Strom Thurmond’s son, Paul (a Charleston County council member).

Meanwhile, in upstate South Carolina, Republican Rep. Bob Inglis is expected to lose his House seat to Tea Party favorite Trey Gowdy; Inglis only won 28 percent of the vote in the primary to Gowdy’s 39 percent. Inglis got into trouble for voting for TARP and daring to criticize Glenn Beck.

In North Carolina, it’s anybody’s guess as to whether Elaine Marshall or Cal Cunningham will win the Democratic nomination to face Sen. Richard Burr. Marshall led the primary 37-26, narrowly missing the 40 percent threshold for winning the nomination outright. She also got an endorsement from third-place primary finisher Ken Lewis, which added to her strength among African-American leaders. But Cunningham, who was recruited into the race by the DCCC, has been the aggressor in the runoff, touting his electability.  The only public poll of the runoff, taken by PPP last month, showed the two dead even with a large undecided vote. I’d guess Marshall is still the favorite to win a very low-turnout runoff.

Aficionados of wild campaigns and wilder candidates may be disappointed tonight by the expected defeat of North Carolina Republican congressional candidate Tim D’Annunzio, who according to PPP is trailing Harold Johnson for the right to take on Democratic incumbent Larry Kissell.

With so much national attention on the Carolinas, the ideological drama going on in both parties in Utah may not receive due notice. As you may recall, Utah Republicans dumped Sen. Bob Bennett at a state convention last month as he trailed two challengers for the right to go to today’s primary. The survivors, entrepreneur Tim Bridgewater and former SCOTUS clerk Mike Lee, are both hard-core conservatives by most national standards. But Lee’s national supporters (including Jim DeMint and RedState’s Erick Erickson) are going after Bridgewater hammer-and-tong as little other than the ideological heir to Bennett (who, along with another defeated candidate, Eagle Forum activist Cherilyn Eagar, has endorsed Bridgewater). The one independent poll shows Bridgewater up by nine points, but Lee has released his own poll showing him up nine points.

Meanwhile, Utah’s sole Democratic congressman, Tim Matheson, is facing a serious primary challenge from the left, from retired teacher Claudia Wright. Wright has made Matheson’s opposition to health reform a major theme, and there’s also been talk of Republicans crossing over into the open Democratic primary to “take out” the incumbent (though as always, tactical voting is actually a pretty rare phenomenon). In a late poll, Matheson led Wright 52-33, but whatever vote Wright receives will be closely watched for national implications, given progressive grumbling about Blue Dogs like Matheson.

Photo credit: maryaustinphoto

California, Iowa, Nevada Among the States to Watch Next Tuesday

Friday, June 4th, 2010
Ed Kilgore



Ed Kilgore is a PPI senior fellow, as well as managing editor of The Democratic Strategist, an online forum.

by Ed Kilgore

Next Tuesday 10 states (including California, Iowa and Nevada) will hold primaries, and Arkansas and Georgia will hold runoffs for the U.S. Senate and a congressional special election respectively.

There’s something interesting going on in every one of these states, but national attention has mainly focused on California, Iowa, Nevada, South Carolina and Arkansas.

The marquee California races, the GOP nomination battles for governor and U.S. senator, have become a bit anticlimactic, with Meg Whitman appearing to run away with the former and Carly Fiorina with the latter, according to a whole battery of recent polls (see the trendlines here and here). Total spending in the GOP governor’s race has now gone over $100 million, but Steve Poizner’s stretch-drive efforts to make the primary revolve entirely around Meg Whitman’s refusal to endorse Arizona’s new immigration law don’t seem to be striking much gold. Whitman, at some peril to her general election standing, has continued round-the-clock aerial pounding of Poizner for alleged liberalism on abortion and spending.

Fiorina has been the only Senate candidate recently on the air, though at vastly smaller levels than the gubernatorial candidates, but may also be benefitting from a consolidation of the conservative vote against pro-gay-rights, pro-choice early front-runner Tom Campbell, at the expense of the other conservative candidate, Tea Party favorite Chuck DeVore.

While political junkies might hope for late drama in these races, it’s worth noting that roughly half the vote in California will be cast early by mail.

In both contests, the Democrats (Jerry Brown and Barbara Boxer) awaiting the ultimate victor in November have enjoyed the intra-Republican slugfest as an opportunity to raise money, and both have been moving up to solid leads in general election polls.

As always, the California primary ballot has a number of initiatives, but the only one of national significance this time around would create a Louisiana-style “jungle primary” system that abolishes party primaries altogether and sends the top two performers (if no one wins a majority) into a runoff. In the current California atmosphere of deep hostility to the status quo, the initiative has a good chance of passage despite strong opposition from both major parties.

Iowa’s Republican primary is interesting mainly as a barometer of that very influential state’s conservative movement, currently obsessed with overturning last year’s state court decision legalizing same-sex marriage, and its potential impact on the 2012 presidential campaign. In the gubernatorial primary, former four-term governor Terry Branstad (who has been endorsed by Mitt Romney) is the far-and-away front-runner, but the one recent public poll shows hard-core cultural conservative Bob Vander Plaats (Mike Huckabee’s 2008 campaign chairman in the state) within theoretical striking distance. An upset would be very bad news for Romney, and very good news for embattled Democratic incumbent Chet Culver. But Branstad got a late break yesterday when Sarah Palin surprisingly (given the less-than-warm feelings of her close right-to-life allies toward the former governor) endorsed his candidacy. There are also a couple of very competitive Republican House primaries, particularly the contest to choose an opponent for Democratic Rep. Leonard Boswell, in which former Iowa State University wrestling coach Jim Gibbons in the favorite.

In Nevada, the big development has been the steady decline in support for the longtime front-runner in the Republican Senate race, Sue Lowden, and a surge in support for Tea Party stalwart Sharron Angle, who has also benefitted from Club for Growth backing. Two polls this week have shown Angle running significantly ahead of both Lowden and Las Vegas businessman Danny Tarkanian. But Angle presently appears to be the weakest candidate against incumbent Harry Reid, who has been slowly rising in general election polls. Reid will have a big financial advantage over the winner of the GOP primary. Meanwhile, in the governor’s race, scandal-plagued incumbent Republican Jim Gibbons looks almost certain to lose to former Attorney General Brian Sandoval, who will face Harry Reid’s son Rory (who is Clark County Commission Chairman).

The South Carolina Republican gubernatorial primary has turned into a circus of late with all attention focused on allegations of marital infidelity against state Rep. Nikki Haley, the hard-core conservative “reformer” (and Mark Sanford protégé) who took a lead over three rivals right before the allegations broke. If no further proof of the allegations emerges before next Tuesday, Haley will make it into a runoff, though it’s unclear whether Attorney General Henry McMaster (the early favorite), U.S. Rep. Gresham Barrett (who’s been struggling to defend his vote for TARP), or Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer (who has high unfavorable ratings and has been accused by Haley of feeding the allegations against her) will survive with her. In the overshadowed Democratic primary, state Rep. Vincent Sheheen is a slight favorite over state school superintendent Jim Rex, with a runoff possible.

And in Arkansas’ Democratic Senate runoff, there hasn’t been any credible public polling of the Bill Halter/Blanche Lincoln battle, but the shape of the race as a war of labor and business surrogates hasn’t changed since the primary, with unions spending well over $2 million in the runoff for Halter, and business groups running ads attacking Halter on Lincoln’s behalf. Lincoln is mostly relying, however, on personal campaigning with Bill Clinton. And for all the TV ads in this race, it will largely come down to turnout, with Lincoln focusing on African-American voters and Halter trying to get southern Arkansas voters to return to the polls. As the challenger in an anti-incumbent year who exceeded expectations in the primary, Halter is the assumed favorite, but anything could happen if turnout’s low.

Ed Kilgore’s PPI Political Memo runs every Tuesday and Friday.

Photo credit: Aprilzosia’s Photostream

Hawaii Gets a GOP Congressman (for Six Months)

Tuesday, May 25th, 2010
Ed Kilgore



Ed Kilgore is a PPI senior fellow, as well as managing editor of The Democratic Strategist, an online forum.

by Ed Kilgore

Since my last update, there’s been a special election in Hawaii to fill the unexpired portion of Democratic Rep. Neil Abercrombie’s term (Abercrombie resigned to focus on his gubernatorial bid). And as widely expected, a split in the Democratic vote gave the seat to Republican Charles Djou, who won 39 percent of the vote, while state senator Colleen Hanabusa got 30 percent and former congressman Ed Case took 27 percent.

It was an embarrassing setback not just for Hawaii Democrats but for those in Washington, who eventually threw up their hands and got out of the race having failed to convince either Democrat to withdraw in favor of the other. The general election in November, however, will be a different matter, since only one Democrat will be on the ballot, so Djou is probably getting no more than an extended taxpayer-financed vacation in Our Nation’s Capital.

In Connecticut, the two parties held nominating conventions for the U.S. Senate, and recently embattled Attorney General Richard Blumenthal brushed off criticism over his “misstatement” about serving in Vietnam to win the Democratic nod. On the Republican side, self-funding conservative wrestling executive Linda McMahon upset the longtime front-runner, former Rep. Rob Simmons. Just today, after initially indicating he would fight for the nomination in a primary, Simmons suspended his campaign.

Now national political attention is being focused on a batch of upcoming primaries: notably Alabama (gubernatorial primaries in both parties) on June 1 and Arkansas (the Senate runoff), California (GOP primaries for governor and Senate), Iowa (Republican gubernatorial primary), Nevada (Republican gubernatorial and Senate primaries) and South Carolina (gubernatorial primaries in both parties) on June 8.

Most of the news on these contests involves new polling data, and we’ll get to that in a moment. But aficionados of political sleaze and scandal are again being drawn to South Carolina, where front-running Republican gubernatorial candidate Nikki Haley, a Mark Sanford protégé, has been hit with allegations of an illicit affair by her alleged former lover, a political blogger who once worked for both Sanford and Haley. Haley has angrily denied the allegations, and has been backed up by prominent supporter Sarah Palin, who, like Haley, suggests the whole thing is a smear made up by Haley’s political enemies. The site that published the allegations is now indicating it has possession of verifying information in the form of emails and text messages between the alleged lovers, and is threatening to make it available to the courts (if sued), if not the public. The Columbia State’s front-page story on the furor says the allegations have plunged the gubernatorial race into “turmoil,” which seems a fair assessment.

Poll Watch

The timing of the Haley brouhaha is interesting: today a second consecutive poll (conducted before the story broke), this one from PPP, came out showing her opening up a big lead in the primary, though probably heading for a runoff (Haley’s at 39 percent, with three rivals — Attorney General Henry McMaster, U.S. Rep. Gresham Barrett, and Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer — bunched together in the teens).

In other polling developments, SUSA’s got a new poll out in CA, which shows Republican gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman and Senate candidate Carly Fiorina opening up sudden big leads. The last SUSA poll, just two weeks ago, had Steve Poizner closing to within the margin of error against Whitman, and Fiorina trailing Tom Campbell by 11 points. Now they have Whitman up 54-27, and Fiorina up over Campbell 46-23 (with Chuck DeVore at 14 percent). By contrast, the R2K/DKos poll released four days ago showed Campbell leading Fiorina 37-22 (with DeVore at 14 percent), and Whitman with a narrower 46-36 lead over Poizner. Will all this contradictory data swirling around, I suspect the expectations for the primary will be set once the more authoritative Field and LA Times polls come out, probably this week.

A new R2K/DKos poll of Alabama has a surprisingly close race for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination, with U.S. Rep. Artur Davis holding a 41-33 lead over state Agriculture Secretary Ronnie Sparks. Sparks has been getting endorsements from African-American groups recently, though Davis, who has heavily outspent Sparks, is still the favorite to win without a runoff. On the Republican side, the poll confirmed months of data showing Bradley Byrne leading a large field (though with far less than necessary to win without a runoff) with 29 percent; Judge Roy Moore running second at 23 percent; and Tim James — Moore’s longtime rival for the Christian Right vote — third at 17 percent.

On the heels of Andrew Cuomo’s official announcement of candidacy for governor of New York, Siena has a new poll showing the Democrat trouncing likely Republican nominee Rick Lazio by a 66-24 margin. The same poll also shows big leads for two other Democrats, Sens. Chuck Schumer and Kirstin Gillibrand.

And soon after Republican Dino Rossi’s long-awaited announcement that he would challenge Sen. Patty Murray, the University of Washington published a poll showing Murray leading Rossi 44-40 in what will likely be a long, tough race.

Ed Kilgore’s PPI Political Memo runs every Tuesday and Friday.

Charlie Crist to Run “Outsider” Campaign. Will Voters Buy It?

Friday, April 30th, 2010
Ed Kilgore



Ed Kilgore is a PPI senior fellow, as well as managing editor of The Democratic Strategist, an online forum.

by Ed Kilgore

The big news this week was the much-telegraphed announcement yesterday by Florida Gov. Charlie Crist that he will abandon the Republican senatorial primary (where he was in danger of being trounced by Marco Rubio) and instead re-file as an independent candidate in that race.

Crist’s gambit raises a lot of questions, most immediately about how many of his donors will ask for their money back, and how, exactly, he will negotiate the very difficult shoals of an independent candidacy in a state famous for its partisanship. The instant GOP blowback was intense, as Jonathan Martin of Politico reported:

Immediately after he gave his speech, his campaign manager and two press aides resigned. His mail vendor and media consultant also indicated that they would not remain with him as he pursued a third-party bid.

In Washington, the very GOP senators who had anointed him as the party’s favorite last year castigated him as an untrustworthy opportunist and demanded that he return their contributions and those of other Republicans.

Crist appears determined to run an “outsider” campaign, which will be somewhat difficult for an incumbent governor and former darling of the national GOP establishment. The first post-announcement three-way polls will be very interesting.

While it was completely overshadowed by the Crist drama, the Florida senatorial race was also roiled by reports that billionaire investor Jeff Greene, who bet against the housing bubble and won big, will enter the Democratic primary against U.S. Rep. Kendrick Meek, who had been focused on the general election. Greene is apparently being advised by the eccentric duo of Joe Trippi and Doug Schoen.

The other trend worth watching this week was the sudden dilemma posed to Republican candidates for various offices across the country by Arizona’s new immigration law, which among other things, authorized law enforcement officers to demand proof of citizenship from anyone “reasonably suspected” of being in the country illegally. While virtually all Republicans have defended the Arizona action as an indictment of the failure of the federal government to “protect the borders,” the specific law has struck sparks, particularly among candidates in highly competitive Republican primaries.

In Nevada, for example, the front-runner in the gubernatorial race, Brian Sandoval, who happens to be both a Latino and suspected by hard-core conservatives of being a moderate squish, instantly endorsed the Arizona law. His main opponent, incumbent Jim Gibbons, who has been running as the true conservative candidate, demurred, arguing that Nevada didn’t need that sort of law because it wasn’t a border state. And a third candidate who is trying to outflank Gibbons on the right, Mike Montandon, not only endorsed the Arizona initiative but called profiling by law enforcement officers — the main concern many have had with the Arizona law — absolutely essential.

The furor over the Arizona initiative has not been confined to the West. It may, in fact, have its greatest impact on Republicans in the Deep South, where Hispanic immigration has been visible enough to upset conservatives, but has not yet created a significant voting bloc. Almost immediately after the enactment of the Arizona law, Alabama Republican gubernatorial candidate Tim James, who is struggling to overcome Judge Roy Moore as the Christian conservative candidate in that race, launched an ad attacking his own state’s practice of offering drivers’ tests in languages other than English.

Next door in Georgia, gubernatorial candidate Nathan Deal, who recently resigned from the U.S. House on the heels of an ethics investigation, publicly called for enactment of an Arizona-style immigration system in his own state. And in South Carolina, Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer, who earlier compared subsidized school lunch beneficiaries to “stray animals,” harnessed the Arizona controversy to his own distinctive message in the gubernatorial race by suggesting that immigrants wouldn’t be coming to the Palmetto State if lazy welfare bums were willing to work.

It’s an easy guess that immigration fever will spread in highly competitive southern Republican primaries, and perhaps elsewhere. In general, cultural issues can be expected to pop up where candidates are trying to distinguish themselves in a Republican Party that’s now monolithically — even radically — conservative on economic and fiscal issues.

Poll Watch

In polling news, there were two big national surveys released this week, one by the Washington Post/ABC News, and the other by Pew. The WaPo/ABC poll had some good news for Democrats:

The public trusts Democrats more than Republicans to handle the major problems facing the country by a double-digit margin, giving Democrats a bigger lead than they held two months ago, when Congress was engaged in the long endgame over divisive health-care legislation. A majority continues to see Obama as “just about right” ideologically, despite repeated GOP efforts to define the president as outside the mainstream.

Those polled also say they trust Obama over Republicans in Congress to deal with the economy, health care and, by a large margin, financial regulatory reform. And the president continues to get positive marks on his overall job performance, with, for the first time since the fall, a majority of independents approving.

Pew (PDF), on the other hand, found Republicans drawing even with Democrats on five of six major issues (the exception being energy policy). Go figure.

Ed Kilgore’s PPI Political Memo runs every Monday and Friday.

Democracy as a Free Lunch for Islamofascists

Monday, April 12th, 2010
Ed Kilgore



Ed Kilgore is a PPI senior fellow, as well as managing editor of The Democratic Strategist, an online forum.

by Ed Kilgore

As I am sure you have noticed, one of the big conservative talking points in recent months has been that the Obama administration and congressional Democrats despise democracy because they have (sic!) used “revolutionary methods” to (sic!) “cram down” health reform against the manifest wishes of the American people, who wisely oppose socialism. Fortunately, Republicans are determined to help Americans “take back their country” in November.

But at the very same time, bless them, conservatives can’t help but express some long-held negative feelings about this small-d-democratic claptrap. One sign is their great hostility to any efforts to encourage higher levels of voting (though this is typically framed as opposition to “voter fraud,” evidence for which is completely lacking). Another is the Tea Party theory that there are absolute limits on the size and cost of government that either are or should be enshrined in the Constitution or enforced by the states, regardless of the results of national elections. And still another involves periodic bursts of outrage over people who don’t pay income taxes being allowed to vote.

This last meme got a boost very recently when estimates emerged that 47 percent of U.S. households won’t have any 2009 federal income tax liability.

“We have 50 percent of people who are getting something for nothing,” sneered Curtis Dubay, senior tax policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation.

Sean Hannity chipped in with alarums about the implications of “half of Americans not paying taxes.”

One conservative site took the AP story on this data and added this helpful subtitle: “Tax Day Is Just Christmas For Many.”

Another had an even more suggestive title: “Let’s Make You Spend More on Me,” along with a chart showing upward federal spending trends. This interpretation is clearly just a hop, skip and jump from the “culture of dependency” rhetoric most famously expressed by South Carolina Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer in his speech comparing subsidized school lunch beneficiaries with stray animals who shouldn’t be encouraged with free food. And in retrospect, Bauer showed some unorthodox brilliance in galvanizing conservative anger about socialist “free lunch” redistribution toward kids who are literally receiving free lunches.

Now the various conservative “analysts” of the free-lunch, free-rider phenomenon rarely go to the trouble of acknowledging that most of that lucky 47 percent not owing federal income taxes (which represent less than half of federal revenues) pay high and very regressive federal payroll taxes, not to mention even more regressive state and local sales and property taxes. Nor do they note that most non-federal-income-tax-paying households are either retirees living on savings and retirement benefits or working poor families with kids (the beneficiaries of those child tax credits that conservatives are always promoting as “pro-family” policies). And I’ve yet to see even one concede that the 47 percent figure is a temporary spike attributable to the recession and to short-term tax credits that will expire with the economic stimulus program.

While the reverse-class-warfare subtext of some of the conservative angst about alleged tax-and-benefit freeloaders is pretty clear, there are those who would link it to an even more lurid, culture-war theme. Check out this remarkable weekend post from National Review’s Mark Steyn, who compared our system of “representation without taxation to” — no, I’m not making this up! — Muslim oppression of non-Muslims. Gaze in awe:

United States income tax is becoming the 21st-century equivalent of the “jizya” — the punitive tax levied by Muslim states on their non-Muslim citizens: In return for funding the Islamic imperium, the infidels were permitted to carry on practicing their faith. Likewise, under the American jizya, in return for funding Big Government, the non-believers are permitted to carry on practicing their faith in capitalism, small business, economic activity, and the other primitive belief systems to which they cling so touchingly.

So there you have it: socialism and Islamofascism nicely bound up in the policies of that madrassa-attending elitist, Barack Obama.

However you slice it, the conservative commitment to democracy sometimes seems limited to those “real Americans” who think right and vote right. At a minimum, progressives should not let them combine such attitudes with pious invocations of the Popular Will.

This item is cross-posted at The Democratic Strategist.

Photo credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/katerkate/

The 2010/2012 Endorsement Game

Wednesday, March 17th, 2010
Ed Kilgore



Ed Kilgore is a PPI senior fellow, as well as managing editor of The Democratic Strategist, an online forum.

by Ed Kilgore

One of the important sideshows in the 2010 campaign cycle is the intervention of potential 2012 Republican presidential candidates in current GOP primaries.

Sarah Palin has received considerable attention for endorsing Tea Party favorite and libertarian scion Rand Paul for the Senate in Kentucky over Mitch McConnell’s buddy Trey Grayson, and also for endorsing her old running mate, John McCain, in his fight with right-wing talk show host and former U.S. Rep. J.D. Hayworth.

Mike Huckabee has been more aggressive in his endorsements, mainly by supporting candidates who endorsed him in 2008. Huck struck gold by getting out early in support of Tea Party/conservative icon Marco Rubio’s challenge to Charlie Crist in Florida — long before Rubio began crushing Crist in the polls. Beyond that, Huck has endorsed controversial gubernatorial candidates in two early 2012 caucus/primary states: Lt. Gov. Andre (“Stray Animals”) Bauer, and Iowa social conservative Bob Vander Plaats. The latter is an especially interesting endorsement; if Vander Plaats upsets former Gov. Terry Branstad (who is closely affiliated with Mitt Romney supporters in that state) in the Iowa gubernatorial primary in June, Huck will be in good shape to repeat his 2008 victory in the Iowa Caucuses.

Like Huckabee, Mitt Romney has kept his endorsements so far limited to 2008 allies (with the exception of John McCain). Those include front-running California gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman and longshot Alabama gubernatorial candidate Kay Ivy. But two recent Romney endorsements (again, of people who endorsed Mitt in 2008) have drawn national attention: embattled incumbent Sen. Bob Bennett of Utah (a Romney hotbed, for obvious reasons), for whom conservatives have long knives out, and then state Rep. Nikki Haley of South Carolina, a big favorite of the right-wing blogosphere.

Meanwhile, Tim Pawlenty, after doing the Right thing by endorsing conservative Doug Hoffmann in a red-hot New York special election last year, announced he would eschew further interventions in competitive Republican primaries. But he made an exception for John McCain, presumably after ensuring he would receive cover for this step from Palin and Romney.

If Hayworth manages to beat McCain, he won’t owe any 2012 candidates a thing. But there are plenty of other competitive primaries later this year where the presidentials haven’t weighed in, and the chess game of endorsements will be very interesting.

This item is cross-posted at The Democratic Strategist.

Win Dixie

Tuesday, March 9th, 2010
Ed Kilgore



Ed Kilgore is a PPI senior fellow, as well as managing editor of The Democratic Strategist, an online forum.

by Ed Kilgore

As we all understand, Republicans are about to have a pretty good election in November. Much of the GOP excitement revolves around congressional races that could unseat “red-state” Democrats who won during the 2006 or 2008 cycles, along with a number of incumbents (some of whom have decided to retire) who have been around much longer. Ground zero for the Republican tsunami is, of course, the Deep South, where in some areas John McCain did better in 2008 than George W. Bush did in 2004, and where every available indicator shows the president to be very unpopular among white voters.

But beneath this storyline, some odd and counterintuitive things are going on. In three Deep South states, Georgia, Alabama, and South Carolina, Democrats have a decent chance of retaking long-lost governorships, in part because of infighting among Republican candidates, and in part because Republican rule in those states has not been terribly successful or popular. It’s far too early to make predictions, but it’s possible that we’re in for a repeat of the astounding gubernatorial Trifecta that Democrats pulled off in those same three states in 1998. That event confounded widespread assessments that the South had become a one-party GOP region, and it could happen again, in even more unlikely circumstances.

Our own appraisal begins in Georgia, with one of the surprise winners of 1998, former Governor Roy Barnes. Barnes lost his reelection bid in 2002 to Sonny Perdue, a party-switching state senator, despite the power of incumbency and a huge financial advantage. Since then, Barnes has regularly admitted his mistakes. And, amazingly enough, in the latest Georgia gubernatorial poll, he’s running ahead of every single Republican candidate.

Meanwhile, Georgia Republicans, who have dominated state politics since 2002, are having some serious problems with their own gubernatorial bench. The consistent frontrunner in the polls, longtime insurance commissioner John Oxendine, is awash in ethics allegations about contributions from the insurance companies that he is responsible for regulating. His record is so blatantly bad that none other than Erick Erickson, the Georgia-based proprietor of the nationally influential, hard-core conservative web site RedState, has said he’d vote for Barnes if Oxendine is the GOP nominee.

Rather pathetically, the alternative to Oxendine and the favorite of some party insiders is Representative Nathan Deal of Georgia’s Ninth District (like Perdue, a party-switcher), who recently said he would resign his congressional seat after a health care vote to concentrate on his gubernatorial campaign. As it happens, Deal’s resignation managed to short-circuit a House Ethics Committee investigation into a no-bid state auto-salvage contract that was awarded to a company which Deal controls. The insider buzz in Atlanta is that Deal was motivated to resign, in part, because of panic among Georgia Republican pooh-bahs who worried that Oxendine would walk away with the gubernatorial nomination on name ID alone.

The rest of the Republican gubernatorial hopefuls are struggling as well. The entire party, and several of the gubernatorial candidates, were tainted by association with disgraced former House Speaker Glenn Richardson, who was forced to resign after a lurid sex-and-lobbying scandal. The one candidate who seems ethically starchy, Secretary of State Karen Handel, has struggled to raise the money necessary to win, and also suffers from the perception that she’s the unpopular Sonny Perdue’s chosen successor.

All these Republican problems could eventually fade, and Roy Barnes must also navigate a Democratic primary against Attorney General Thurbert Baker, a law-’n-order conservative who is one of the nation’s longest-serving African American statewide elected officials (as well as two other lesser but credible opponents). Nevertheless at present, Barnes—or Baker, if he could somehow upset Barnes—looks entirely viable for November.

Next door in Alabama, you’d think that the Democratic gubernatorial frontrunner, Congressman Artur Davis, wouldn’t stand a chance. He’s a member of the much-hated United States Congress; he’s African American; he’s a close personal friend of Barack Obama; and he’s frequently been tagged, like the president, as an Ivy League-educated, twenty-first-century–style black politician. But the sparse public polling available shows Davis in a very strong position for the general election, assuming that he dispenses with a primary challenge from state agriculture commissioner Ron Sparks, who’s been struggling to raise money. Davis, who has long nursed gubernatorial ambitions, carefully tailored his congressional record to Alabama public opinion: He voted against health care reform in the House, and he was also the first Congressional Black Caucus member (and, for that matter, the first one on the Ways and Means Committee) to call for Charlie Rangel to step aside from his powerful chairmanship.

Meanwhile, there is no real frontrunner in the Republican gubernatorial primary, which bids fair to become an ideological flame war. Back in 2002, the “establishment” candidate, state Senator Bradley Byrne, made the fatal mistake of voting for a-tax reform initiative that was soundly defeated in an emphatic expression of Alabamians’ mistrust of government. Tim James, son of former conservative Democratic and Republican Governor Fob James, was one of the main opponents of that initiative, and he will bring it up constantly. Meanwhile Christian Right warhorse Roy Moore, the famous “Ten Commandments Judge,” is actually running second to Byrne in early polls. All of the dynamics in the race will pull the GOP candidates to the hard-right, while Artur Davis continues to occupy the political center; and his candidacy will almost certainly boost African American turnout to near-2008 levels. That means anything could happen in November.

South Carolina is often thought of as the most Republican of Southern states. But Mark Sanford, the disgraced incumbent governor, has complicated his party’s prospects. Meanwhile, an ideological civil war is brewing that reflects the growing tension between the state’s two Republican senators, right-wing bomb thrower Jim DeMint and the more moderate Lindsey Graham (Graham, long suspect among home-state conservatives for his friendship with John McCain and his occasional bipartisanship, has recently been formally censured by two of South Carolina’s county GOP organizations for a variety of sins). As in Georgia and Alabama, the Republican gubernatorial field is a mess: Nobody is a frontrunner and all the candidates are stampeding to the hard right. And I do mean hard right. In a sign of the times, Lieutenant Governor Andre Bauer, who has few friends in the state’s Republican establishment, delivered a speech comparing recipients of subsidized school lunches to “stray animals” who should no longer be fed unconditionally. While he took a few shots from fellow Republicans for his indiscreet language, nobody disputed, and some praised, his basic premise that any form of public assistance corrupts its recipients and should come with some sort of reciprocal obligation.

The frontrunners in early polls are Bauer and Attorney General Henry McMaster. Upstate Congressman Gresham Barrett, who must overcome the opprobrium of voting for TARP, is close behind. Meanwhile, Sanford’s protégé, state Representative Nikki Haley (who was even endorsed by the governor’s ex-wife), is trying to push the campaign hard right by opposing any expenditure of federal stimulus dollars in this high-unemployment state. At a recent candidate forum, when the rivals were pushed to call themselves “DeMint Republicans” or “Graham Republicans,” Bauer and Haley flatly identified with DeMint, while McMasters and Barrett dodged the question.

On the Democratic side, a Rasmussen poll in December showed the front-running Democrat, State School Superintendent Jim Rex, actually beating Bauer and running within single digits against other GOP candidates. (State Representative Vincent Sheheen is also a credible Democratic candidate). Again, anything could happen, but the assumption that Republicans have a lock on this state’s elections is as dubious as the same assumption back in 1998.

So, at a time when Democrats are despairing of good news, it’s important to understand that the donkey isn’t quite dead, even in the Deep South. There are consequences to Republican extremism and malfeasance in office. And, when GOP candidates battle for first place on the crazy train of contemporary conservatism, it’s Democrats who stand to benefit.

This item is cross-posted at The Democratic Strategist.