Georgia: A Parade of Crazy

This is the second in what will be a series of articles about the U.S. Senate races in 2014.  Kentucky and Mississippi are scheduled after Georgia.

—–

The last Democrat to hold a U.S. Senate seat in Georgia was Max Cleland.  A captain in the Army and decorated veteran of the Vietnam War who lost both of his legs and an arm in service to his country, he was one of the few remaining members of the Democratic old guard in Georgia.  Conservative on some issues yet in line with the mainstream party platform on abortion and the environment, he was part of a dying breed of Southern Democrat (I may soon post about the history of Democrats in the South more generally).  In 1996 he won his first and only term by a mere 30,000 votes, in part thanks to a third party candidate on the ballot.  He succeeded veteran Democratic Senator Sam Nunn, a 25 year member of the Senate and a staple of Georgian society and politics.

When Mr. Cleland was up for reelection in 2002, he faced a tough fight.  Not only was Georgia slipping away from Democrats generally, he had a wily opponent in Saxby Chambliss.  Mr. Chambliss was a longtime member of the House and strongly supported by the Republican leadership in the Senate. 

The Senate Series: Why You Should Read

Hello everyone,

While I realize that most of you would prefer to read about why I don’t like the way the big law firm and law school world operates rather than politics, there is only so much I can write about those topics.  While there are some other posts coming related to those juicier areas, there is only so much material to work with.  I also just like writing about elections, which is why I have begun this series of posts on the 2014 Senate races.  Ergo the Senate Series.

The purpose of those posts is not to be a forecaster.  We have a series of excellent institutions doing that already, and I will rely heavily on them and on polls for my posts.  Nate Silver’s 538 Blog, Larry Sabato’s Crystal Ball, and the Rothenberg Political Report are all great and I encourage you to read them if you want a deeper look at things.

Massachussets: A Return To Political Normalcy

Senator Ed Markey (D-MA)

This is the first in what will be a series of articles about the U.S. Senate races in 2014.  After Massachusetts, Georgia, Kentucky, and Mississippi are scheduled.

_____

Back in 2013 I wrote a couple of articles on the 2013 special Senate election in Massachusetts, the first such election since former Senator Scott Brown‘s surprise victory in 2010.  The 2013 special was required due to former Senator John Kerry‘s retirement from the Senate to become secretary of state.  It pitted longtime Representative Ed Markey (D) against Gabriel Gomez (R), a businessman, Navy SEAL, and relative political newcomer.  Democrats fretted desperately about the election, doing everything in their power to avoid a repeat of the 2010 disaster, but in the end had little to worry about.  Mr. Markey went on to win the election by 10 points, a great margin for non-incumbent Democrats seeking statewide office in Massachusetts.  Mr. Markey has to run for a full term in 2014.

The breakdown of the election has been well documented elsewhere, including by me, so I will not re-analyze it.  At the time, there was some concern that Mr. Markey’s 2014 reelection bid could be complicated, especially if Mr. Brown (who, while popular went on to lose in  the 2012 general to now-Senator Elizabeth Warren by 7.5 points) entered the race.  That is not going to happen, as Mr. Brown has announced he will be running for Senate in New Hampshire against Democratic incumbent Jeanne Shaheen, leaving Mr. Markey with only token opposition.

Manchin and the NRA: Is the Gun Lobby Out of Touch?

Senator Joe Manchin III of West Virginia (2010-present)

When former governor and current Senator from West Virginia Joe Manchin III ran for former Senator Robert Byrd‘s seat in 2010, he was strongly backed by the National Rifle Association (“NRA”). The now-Senator famously shot a bullet through a copy of the cap-and-trade bill in a campaign commercial—literally. It is widely credited with helping turn around his campaign and winning him a full term in 2012. Later in the election, he walked around with a gun resting on his shoulder and told the camera he didn’t have to shoot the bill again because it was already dead. Repeatedly, the senator has said he does not regret the add. He has a lifetime NRA rating of A. The falling out he has had with the most prominent gun lobby, then, came as something of a surprise.

In the aftermath of the school shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Connecticut, much fanfare was made of imposing new gun control legislation, both in individual states and nationally. While some jurisdictions–Connecticut and Colorado in particular–enacted tough new laws, the Federal government found itself mired in the slog of obstructionist Republicans and gutless Democrats. Vice President Joe Biden‘s special commission went nowhere. So when a bipartisan duo of senators historically backed by the NRA stepped up to the plate to push for almost universal background checks, a modest proposal, it looked like the best deal that could pass.

Rand Paul: DOMA Decision Opens Door To Non-Human Spouses

Senator Rand Paul (R-KY)
2011 to the Present

I’m writing a longer post on the United States Supreme Court‘s (“the Court”) decision in United States v. Windsor, 570 U.S. __ (2013), the landmark civil rights decision that today struck down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (“DOMA”) that prohibited the Federal government from recognizing gay marriages. I wanted to write, however, to highlight a comment I did not expect. The longer analysis of the Court’s opinion, the first in a four part series analyzing the Court’s decisions this week on minority rights, will be out later this week.

While I am not in the least surprised by organizations like the American Family Association saying that Federal recognition of gay marriage leads to bestiality, pedophilia, and polygamy, I was somewhat taken aback by Senator Rand Paul‘s (R-KY) comments. The supposedly libertarian member from Kentucky, when asked by Politico if the decision opened the door to polygamy, went a step further and said “it is difficult because if we have no laws on this [marriage], people take it one extension further. ‘Does it have to be human?’” and followed up by stating that we can’t just say “‘oh, we’re punting on it and marriage can be anything.’”

Senator Markey: At Least Until 2014

Senator-Elect Ed Markey (D-MA)

At 9:22 pm on the East Coast, the AP and Politico projected a win in the Massachusetts special election to the U.S. Senate for Representative Ed Markey, the Democratic candidate.  The Boston Globe followed soon thereafter.  At 9:32, Gabriel Gomez, the Republican candidate, called Mr. Markey to concede the race and gave a halting and uninspiring concession speech.  Mr. Markey’s victory speech at 10:16 pm from the Park Plaza Hotel in Boston was much more traditional and had a luster that Mr. Gomez’s lacked.  While early in the night Mr. Gomez held an advantage as the votes came in, as soon as precincts in Suffolk County started reporting, the tide turned to Mr. Markey, as expected.  The almost-final numbers, at 10:17 pm are 54.9% to 44.7%, a total of 637,822 votes to 518,566 votes, with 98.9% of the precincts reporting.

Listening to WBZ 1030 Boston tonight has been a fascinating experience.  The callers, short interviews with Democratic and Republican strategists, and the insight into the pseudo-scandal Mr. Gomez had has been quite interesting.  The Republican candidate wrote Governor Deval Patrick (D-MA) after former Senator John Kerry (D-MA), now Secretary of State, resigned.  He asked to be appointed to the vacant seat, promising to support President Barack Obama‘s agenda and to not run in the special election.  Mr. Patrick ultimately appointed his chief of staff, William “Mo” Cowan to the seat, but that letter put off a lot of Republican voters who strongly supported former Senator Scott Brown (R-MA) in 2010.  The best part of the night on the radio was when a guy calling himself Charlie called in late in the night, but was identified by the host as someone who’d referred to himself as Tommy earlier.  It was rather hilarious.

Massachusetts: It’ll Be Markey

Gabriel Gomez (L) and Ed Markey Debating

The special election in Massachusetts to replace now-Secretary of State John Kerry is finally upon us. Voters will finish going to the polls in less than an hour. Public non-partisan polling has Representative Ed Markey, the Democratic candidate, up by double digits as the candidate slams his Republican opponent, Gabriel Gomez, over his lack of support for tougher gun laws. So why does the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee keep insisting it’s “close” and that Republicans may “steal” the seat? Besides getting more donations (which they will need for 2014, but really not now), there’s no reason. I have no doubt that it’ll be Senator Markey in less than 24 hours.

As Politico pointed out recently, Mr. Gomez is no Scott Brown.  No non-partisan polls have shown Mr. Gomez leading the entire campaign, while in 2010 Mr. Brown closed the polling gap and led in the final days.  There is also no surprise factor.  In 2010, Mr. Brown had an advantage because no one expected him to win.  This time, no one is taking chances with big Democratic names stumping for Mr. Markey, and liberal groups spending heavily (for a Blue state) in Massachusetts.  On that note, Democrats have also outspent Republicans 3-to-1. While more money doesn’t always mean a win, in a state that already is Blue that money imbalance should make a bigger difference. In comparison, Mr. Brown greatly out-raised and outspent his Democratic opponent, state Attorney General Martha Coakley, in 2010.  Outside Republican groups were mostly absent from the race, giving Mr. Markey a further advantage.

The Massachusetts Special: Is It Really Close?

Gabriel Gomez (L) and Ed Markey Debating

If you get any emails from the national Democratic Party, from the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (“DSCC”), or any number of other Democratically affiliated groups, you’ve probably been hearing that the special election to fill former Senator and current Secretary of State John Kerry‘s seat is close.  Some Republican polls have the GOP candidate, Gabriel Gomez, trailing Representative Ed Markey (D) by only 3, 5, or 7 points.  Some are within the margin of error.  In a deeply Blue state, 3 to 7 points doesn’t seem like a lot.  The DSCC in particular has been pounding the point home as it requests donations.  Backing up the idea that there could be a Democratic loss is the specter of former Senator Scott Brown‘s 2010 special election victory.  In 2010, no Democrat thought a Republican could win Ted Kennedy’s seat so no one invested in the race.  The Democratic candidate, Attorney General Martha Coakley, ran what nearly everyone describes as a terribly incompetent campaign.  While Mr. Brown lost the seat in 2012 to now-Senator Elizabeth Warren (D), the nearly three years he held it made some Democratic efforts in the Senate difficult.  In short, Democrats have been concerned about Mr. Gomez’s chances this time, and not taking anything for granted.

This is generally a good thing for Democrats.  First, a seat should never be taken for granted.  Second, Democrats are already down a seat in the Senate.  Instead of the 55 seat majority they held after the 2012 election, they now only control 54 seats after the death of Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), and Governor Chris Christie‘s (R-NJ) appointment of now-Senator Jeff Chiesa (R) to the seat.  With five days until the election, the question then isn’t whether Democrats should take this seriously, but how seriously.  There are a couple things to consider.

Christie’s Move: Play It Safe

In a post last night I spoke about Governor Chris Christie’s (R-NJ) dilemma in deciding who to appoint to the U.S. Senate seat vacated recently by the death of Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ).  That decision has come quicker than anticipated, and has surprised the entire political community.

Jeff Chiesa
New Jersey Attorney General (2012-2013) and
Senator (taking office June 10, 2013)

The man whom Governor Christie picked was, as Politico said earlier today, the best kept secret in politics this week.  His name hadn’t even surfaced as a possible contender.  Few people know any of his political positions on issues, and he has indicated that he probably does not plan on running for the seat in October.  The man himself is somewhat of a mystery.  What is not obfuscated, however, are Mr. Christie’s priorities: by picking New Jersey Attorney General Jeff Chiesa (R) for the post he is playing it quite safe for his reelection this November, and may not have national political ambitions in 2016.  Mr. Chiesa’s pick should neither hurt not help Mr. Christie’s chances at reelection this November–but with the governor leading his opponent, state Senator Barbara Buono (D) by 30 to 34 points in the four most recent polls, a neutral pick is all he needed.

Replacing Lautenberg: Christie’s Balancing Act

Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ)
(1982-2001, 2003-2012)

Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) (1982-2001, 2003-2013), a longtime dedicated public servant, died on June 3, 2013, at the age of 89.  As the last World War II veteran to serve in the Senate, his death is the end of an era.  Many have eulogized him in recent days, including another prominent New Jersey politician, Governor Chris Christie (R).  To say that Governor Christie and Senator Lautenberg did not get along would be an understatement.  They disagreed on a host of issues, and often “had words”, according to the governor.  I can only say that many states would be lucky to have a senator like Frank Lautenberg.

Politically, however, the issue becomes appointing and then electing Senator Lautenberg’s successors.  New Jersey law on a U.S. Senate vacancy is muddled, but it boils down to the governor being able to appoint a replacement who can serve through the remainder of the term (which in this case would be January 2015), or until a replacement is elected in a special election.  A special election can only be called by the governor if he or she deems it necessary.  And as Governor Christie said multiple times, he has “deemed it necessary” and called for an August 13 primary and October 16 general.  In his 22 minute press conference announcing the decision (available on Politico and elsewhere), Governor Christie said repeatedly that he believed it was essential to have an elected representative in Washington.  When confronted with the price tag of the election, estimated at almost $24 million USD, he said that you couldn’t put a price on it.  The governor also said he would appoint an individual to serve in the seat until October 16, regardless of whether that person wants to run for the seat or not.  Whoever wins the special election would serve out the remainder of Senator Lautenberg’s term, and would have to run again in 2014 for a full term ending in 2020.