Talk Elections

Though most of our interest in taken up by the Presidential race, I myself and I'm guessing a lot of the rest spend a lot of time analysing individual House and Senate races. Northerndog has another link for senate races but this one is dedicated to people's evaluation of individual House races in 2004. I'm looking at evaluations similar to the ones we have had for the last round of gubernatorial races.
For those who don't have enough info to work with; I recommend the evaluation on the following link;

http://www.cookpolitical.com/display.cfm?section=political&edit_id=233

Needless to say it would be preferable to restrict oneself to neutral evaluations of likely election results and not to state one's opinions of and especially not to attack incumbents or challengers. Obviously if there are allegations which will definitely have an effect on the race that is an exception. Otherwise please make a separate thread.

Look forward to some good old fashioned crystal ball stuff :)

PS. Even if you have enough info, check out the link, this is one of my favorite sites. Info is a bit out of date but among the most comprehensive you will find anywhere.

I don't expect much excitement in the House races, the number of competitive seats is at an all time low, mostly as a result of a redistricting cycle that focused on incumbent protection, (only one competitive seat in CA!).  Incumbents typically win reelection at >98% (in 2002 only 4 incumbents lost to a challengers, though due to redistricting, 4 others lost in districts in which 2 incumbents faced each other).  The real action is usually in open seats, in 2002 6/31 open seats switched party.  So far 2004 has a low number of open seats (this site tracks open seats:
http://www.dcpoliticalreport.com/OpenSeat.htm
Only 6 Democrats and 10 Republicans are retiring or running for another office.
Although there is likely to be only about 2 dozen competitive races, here is Roll Call's top 10 endangered incumbents:
Rodney Alexander, Democrat (LA-5)
Max Burns, Republican (GA-12)
John Hostettler, Republican (IN-8)
Bill Janklow, Republican (SD-AL)
Ken Lucas, Democrat (KY-4)
Jim Marshall, Democrat (GA-3)
Jim Matheson, Democrat (UT-2)
Dennis Moore, Democrat (KS-3)
Rick Renzi, Republican (AZ-1)
Mike Rogers, Republican (AL-3)

Another site to try is: www.dcpoliticalreport.com (http://www.dcpoliticalreport.com)

Anyhow Sachs(who rates races by entertainment value!) has rated the following as "Very Entertaining":

AL 03
AZ 01
CA 03
CA 20
FL 14
FL 16
GA 06
GA 08
IA 02
KA 03
KY 03
LA 05
MO 03
NC 05
PA 15
SC 04
WV 02

And the following as "Exciting":

CO 03
CO 07
GA 11
GA 12
OK 02
SD-al

Okay people lets start getting into specifics. What's everyone's opinion of  the most likely turnovers for the GOP and Democrats- The most vulnerable seat held by a member of both parties.

My vote for most vulnerable Republican seat may be a bit of a surprise. Its John Hostettler, (IN-8)
This seat is called the bloody eight cause of its high turnover but Hostettler has held it for three terms....mostly due to dumb luck. (he has faced the worst possible opponents each time)

Over his terms he immediately alienated liberals, later gained dislike of moderates and at length is gaining the disapproval of even conservatives.

In my opinion all it would take is a decent campaign by an above-average candidate to unseat him. Of course that being said, that could well not happen as it hasn't before.

For Democrats again my choice may not be others first though he is universally regarded as vulnerable.

Its Jim Matheson, Democrat (UT-2)
His district is almost two-thirds republican and while he has taken care to vote the "right" way, the GOP has enough ammo to go after him. This race was neglected the last time because of juicier targets elsewhere. It's likely to be at the top of the GOP list in 2004 and with partisan differences sharpest during the Presidential election its a steep steep hill for Jim Matheson right now.

Look forward to hearing others picks.

And while we are at it why not look for the opposite- strong incumbents. :) :) Now its pointless to look at incumbents in general because over 90% of them are nearly untouchable anyway. Lets narrow the field to freshmen who were elected with >53% of the vote.
Which first timers will turn themselves into entrenched incumbents?
Just as before One pick from each party to start with :)

Utah has a Democrat as one of it's representatives????
Matheson is toast.

Rodney Alexander (LA-5) doesn't look very vunerable at the moment.

Mike Rodgers(AL-3) could be in serious trouble, ditto Max Burns(GA-12)

 

Now for the GOP its an obvious choice. Rep. Beauprez whom everyone must be well known to everyone as the winner of the closest race in 2002 has had his district changed enough to give him a comfortable win. Otherwise (if the new map is thrown out) my vote goes to Ginny Brown-Waite of Florida. Her razor thin margin was more due to the fact that she was up against a five term incumbent than because the district itself is competitive. I expect her to have an easier ride in 2004.

For the democrats no question about it. Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland got only 52% in a VERY democratic seat because he was up against Rep. Connie Morella (a personal hero of mine) Look for him to top 66% at minimum in 2004.

LOL well he follows the profile of democrats who still do well in heavily GOP areas. He has a legendary political family name out west. In Utah Matheson is amost as big as Udall is elsewhere in the west.

Thus he was able to portray himself as an independent son-of-the-soil when he got elected and that too in a much more Urban seat than he has now - in Salt Lake City. (for those who dont know- urban areas tend democratic to varying degrees no matter where in the US- EG> In Utah they may still be majority Republican but much less than the rest of the state)

Still I concur!! He's Toast :D

Good Picks. Not certain abt the first though. Know a bit abt it-being my home state :) Alexander represents a decently GOP (though less so after gerrymandering) district. Still he has one of the most conservative records for a democratic representative so he's looking to the future. Decent grassroots operation too.
My guess is the GOP's best shot to retain this district (retiring GOP Rep. Cooksey held it till 2002) was to win it in 2002. Alexander will give them a hell of a fight next year.
Its still competitive but frankly leans a bit democratic for 2004!

Rodgers is more vulnerable but he was an Alabama Senate minority leader and has a lot of grassroots strength. The district is pretty much split even between the parties and he won it against a strong contender in 2002 (Joe Turnham I think) Next year he will have the advantages of incumbency behind him and that's a big factor in the South.

Max Burns is endangered- thats for sure. Its a VERY democratic district and two years isnt enough time to consolidate. He certainly won't face a ridiculous candidate like Walker next time around :) Still he has influence in congress....President of the GOP freshman class and all :D He has been effective for his district and He wont plan on giving up his seat easy- thats for sure!! :D

Look forward to others responses as well.

I think it is a mistake to choose a vulnerable incumbent simply because he had a close race the last time, or he is representing a district that votes for the opposite party in state wide races.  Often a weak incumbent attracts multiple challengers, who end up increasing the negatives for each other in the primary battle, or split the vote so that a more extreme challenger wins the primary, who is out of step with the philosophy of the.  The key to vulnerable incumbents is who has a strong challenger (i.e. someone who has district wide name recognition, who can raise money to buy media time, and who has a philosophy that fits the district).  After reviewing the Oct30, 2003 CookReport's list of competitive districts (19 Democrats and 17 Republican), I think the following are the most vulnerable:

Democrats = 9
Florida-02
Georgia-03
Kentucky-04
Louisiana-05
New York-01
Pennsylvania-13
Texas-11
Texas-17
Utah-02

Republicans = 4
Arizona-01
Georgia-12
Indiana-08
New Mexico-01

This list is will change as the actual challengers are defined for each district next year.  But it is important to remember, for many of the vulnerable incumbents, this will be the first election they have represented the same voters, since redistricting added new voters to their district in 2002.  So I would expect more of these will end up increasing their winning margin over the 2002 result, than will see their margin decrease.  

AL-3 is a good example of a seat that the Dems need to win to regain the House, If they can run a strong populist dem it should go Dem... but it'll be close.

GA-12 is an even better example of that.
That the Dems hold UT-2 and not GA-12 is insane.

Alexander should be safe barring a GOP landslide(unlikely) or a serious gaffe.
But LA can be weird when it comes to voting...

I said earlier that in theory the House should lean Dem while the Senate should lean GOP.
The reason for that it classic political theory.
Which I presume you lot all know ;)

Well not that insane, after all there are many such. Republicans have no business holding Jim Leach's solidly democratic Iowa seat as well as several others and should definitely have over a dozen southern seats which are over two-thirds republican but held by a dem.

There are a lot of factors which affect this includng the political independence (in reality) of voters despite their partisan preference and the strength of the incumbent on various measures.  

Good point. Its worth keeping in mind and all too often forgotten.

classic political theory??? Not where I come from its not!!! ;)
The Senate its obvious. A majority of states are majority GOP so a majority of senators should be too. - A topic I was going to go into in more detail later.

The house should in my opinion have no reason to be more dem than rep. If you wish to enlighten us please go ahead. Else we shall try hard to live; knowing that great knowledge lies just beyond our grasp :d ;) :P

In effect it's because the lower house is meant to be radical while the upper house is meant to be conservative.
Both are meant to balance each other out.

Like Gene Taylor in Mississippi?

Gene Taylor is an excellent example as are Bud Cramer of Alabama, Ralph Hall and Charlie Stenholm of Texas etc etc
You will find several similarities among these incumbents including unflinching populism and social conservatism and an excellent ideological and cultural "fit" to their districts.

More important (to buttress my earlier point) you will find that these districts are predominantly rural in nature. Rural districts in the south, once the bastion of democratic power, now tend strongly republican at the national level. However at the local level their party identification with the GOP is not too strong and they tend to accept the right type of democrats.

Southern Suburban voters are not so open-minded; the bar for democrats is much higher there. This is why you will see that in the new Texas map several democrats (who already represented majority GOP districts) are placed in districts that seem to vote as strongly as before for the GOP. The difference is they are now much more suburban which means much more loyal to the GOP.

AL-5 would probably be Democrat without Cramer, although not with 73.3%...(mid 50's looks about right).

However the Dems would not win MS-4 without Taylor...
What is usually the most GOP part of Mississippi gave a Democrat 3 quarters of the vote in 2002...

Your point about a rural/suburban divide is excellent.
It may be partially explained by economic self-interest as poor rural areas tend to benifit from Dem economic policies while suburbia tends to benifit from GOP economic policies.
In parts of the South the rural/suburban divide is more marked than the rural/urban divide.

America can be a strange country ;)

Well yes I see what you are getting at but you are taking a someone different meaning of "radical" and "conservative" than the way these terms are used in the contemporary US.

The House was meant to be reflective of short-term popular will- the means to press for urgent and emotive actions that the people demanded.
The Senate was meant to be the voice of reason and sanity where cooler heads prevailed and experts not concerned with immediate re-election worries could consider the long-term good of the United States.

There is no specific reason to associate the first tendency (expression of short-term popular will with liberals/ democrats) and the second (sane and considered action) with conservatives/ republicans.

If you consider the traditional meaning of RADICAL (connected to extremism-pushing for vast changes) then the house is certainly more radical. But that applies to BOTH DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS. While house democrats are more likely to push (RADICAL LIBERAL Concepts) like the single payer healthcare scheme, house republicans are likely to push (RADICAL CONSERVATIVE concepts) like privatization of social security.

Senators of both parties less LIKELY on average to push for either schemes.

So yes the function of both houses as conceived by the founding fathers is being fulfilled but I must respectfully disagree that the nature of one house favors the election of liberals/dems and the other favors elections of conservatives/reps.
One may favor radicals/extremists (House) while the other may favor moderates (Senate) but either of  these can be found in both the two parties and ideologies.

That's more or less the theory.

It's also worth noting that in most other countries with two chambers, the lower tends to be the more leftish of the two.

And that this was the case in the US until the 2000 elections.

The House is currently leaning GOP.  
Even though Bush lost the popular vote by 500,000 in 2000, he won more Congressional districts (228) than Gore (207).  Since Reapportionment in 2002 moved seats from Gore states to Bush states, I expect the Republican districts have actually increased over 2000 (which partly explains why Republicans picked up 6 seats in 2002).

The Senate leans even more to the GOP than the House, since Bush won 30 states in 2000, without the advantage of incumency and assuming equally good candidates, the Senate would probably be closer to 60 Republicans.

How many districts Bush won in 2000 is immaterial to how the house leans(Gore had some serious problems in normally safe Democrat districts).

Well I strongly disagree.
The 2000 election provided an excellent opportunity to determine the underlying preference of voters in each Congressional District.  The Presidential race was not swayed by any large event: no war, economy was OK, no big scandal (I’m assuming Gore was not overly smeared by the Clinton scandal).  Both candidates were mediocre campaigners and neither communicated a vision that inspired voters.  
Of course in many districts the Presidential candidate had fewer votes than the Representative of that district, but that, at least in part, reflects the political reality that most voters defer to incumbents (in 2000 and 2002 >98% of incumbents were re-elected).  Most voters feel their Representative does a good job (the incumbent advantage) even when voters feel Congress does not.
In 2000 Democratic Representatives won in 25 districts Bush won, but Republicans won in only 12 districts Gore won, again suggesting that the tendency for the House is to be Republican.

Are you seriously suggesting that PA-12 is naturally GOP???????

No, the current PA-12 district (Democrat won in 2002 with 74%) was won by Gore 55% vs Bush 44%, so I would call it a natural Democratic district.  
see:
http://www.ncec.org/redistricting/district.phtml?district=pa108

Generally speaking, Gore won less support in Tobacco growing, Coal Mining and poor rural areas than the Dems normally do.

2000 was a strange election in many ways, and that's just one of them.

My information on AL-5 shows the opposite. The republican margin was 10% (55-45) in 2000. Where did you get ur info from? I ask so I can cross-check my info.

It was a 10 point GOP lead in the Presidential election, however a mid 50's Dem % seems like the district's "natural" result at congressional level.

hmm ok.......on what basis?? cause they are a heckva lotta other southern districts with the same Presidential margin. If all of them "tend" democratic then the GOP is in trouble :D

If this is part of your usual theory that districts with lower income people SHOULD vote democratic...................... as has been already discussed at length, you make a good argument but someone needs to tell THEM that.

If there isnt anything more than that to your theory about Al-5, I think its a natural republican district just as Jim Leach's Iowa district is natural democrat. However both districts have incumbents who "fit" the district, they like em regardless of party and thats that!
Lemme know k?

Ryan.

I'm no expert on Alabaman politics, but what I do know is that the Democrat vote was seriously depressed in several areas in the last Presidential election.

And problely will be again.   Problely more so if Dean is the nom.

Not so much Dean(he should do O.K in small towns etc. But not in Alabama), but Kerry et al...

I think Dean will be great for the liberal base but a disaster for down ticket races.

 
  A few things. One, should Rep. Bud Cramer retire, the Democrats probably have a 40% chance at best of retaining his seat. He was almost defeated in 94, had a better run but held to 56% in 96, and had to move his record to the right since then. His seat gave Bush 55% of the vote, and like other rural seats in the South, there is less and less ticket splitting going on. The fact that Rep Mike Rogers won in a high Democratic GOTV effort last year in a district that gave Bush a little more than 52% of the vote points to how much steeper the hill Democrats must climb in the South. The vacant seat in TN that voted for a Democrat had about 4% of GOP strength trimmed off(It gave 49% of the vote for Bush in 2000 vs almost 54% in its previous incarnation) that gave him the winning edge(51%). At 55% of the vote, while its not the most Republican seat in the South, it is almost at a point where Democrats will have difficulties trying to remain vaible in it.

Only if the Dem holding the seat retires.

 Exactly, unless there is a tidal wave that is anti Democrat, a wave that we saw in 94, the Democratic incumbents will have little trouble holding on in  the South. Many like Rep McIntyre of NC, Rep. Lucas of KY and Rep Cramer vote with the GOP on a majority of issues anyways.  People also forget the redistricing i n TX, if upheld, should produce at least 5 more GOP seats.

    People need to cast what took place between the mid 50s and 94, the era that Democratcs controled the house aside. The advantages that enabled the Democrats to hold the house, such as a lack of a viable ground level GOP in the south and the Democrats financial advantage backing liberal incumbents in conservative districts in the Midwest is long gone. If the Democratic nominee is painted as a Northren/Northeastren liberal and even loses like Dukakis did in 88, meaning a solid loss but not losing by a landslide, the GOP probably stands to gain 10 house seats. The ability for Democrats down the ticket to survive has been severely compromised because of the financial advantage they once had being gone.

If the Dem canidate lose like Dukakis not only will it be bad in the house it would be devistating in the senate.

The senate is already going to be devastating for the Dems--they have too many open seats in BUsh country.

FL, NC, GA, SC, most likely LA and then Inouye sounds like he will run again in HI ( sho-in, but he will be 80 when he runs and with a GOP gov, if he dies or has to retire GOP picks up another seat)

House-Down goes Lucas in KY to retirement , expect the GOP to guin for this seat and a clean sweep of the Bluegrass state

Look... I don't have a problem with you airing yours views... but I do have a problem with some of the Usenet like language you have been using.
Tone it down.

?? What? are you talking to me.

What is usenet like language?

ANyone see that CO SCT overturned their redistricting map today?

 Yep, its back to the lines used in the 2002 election in CO. The CO 3rd districts, a seat that will be a open seat should not be too much trouble for the GOP to hold, it gave Bush 54% of the vote in 2000. The CO-7th district, a seat that had the closest election in 2002 has a Republican incumbent, but the area the seat is in voted narrowly for Gore. This will be a very expensive race that will require the GOP to kick up its registrationand get out the vote efforts.

(Potentially) vunerable incumbents:

+= Potentially in trouble, but should be safe
++= Long shot
+++= In moderate danger of losing
++++= In danger of losing
+++++= In SERIOUS danger of losing

Alabama:
03=Mike Rodgers(R)+++++

Arizona:
01=Rick Renzi(R)+++++

Arkansas:
03=John Boozman(R)+

More soon...

Rogers will be help because Alabama is a big Bush state.

 Rep Rodgers is going to have a serious fundraising advantage, and last year he overcame a massive Democratic GOTV effort. At the very worst, his district leans Republican. By the way Pealpolitik, since you are from the UK, why do you have the WVA marker on your name?

  Anyways Realpolitik, as I said before, you really need to understand the cultural dimension(culture wars) of US politics before making more predictions.

I'm not predicting anything.
Rodger's is very vunerable(he only won by a couple of %), and +++++ seems about right, but he still stands a good chance of winning.

My marker is D-WV, because it is only fair that people know which party I support, and because WV is the state that closest resembles where I live.

what is GOTV?


quote author=JNB link=board=11;threadid=46;start=30#msg3242 date=1071001452]


 Rep Rodgers is going to have a serious fundraising advantage, and last year he overcame a massive Democratic GOTV effort. At the very worst, his district leans Republican. By the way Pealpolitik, since you are from the UK, why do you have the WVA marker on your name?

  Anyways Realpolitik, as I said before, you really need to understand the cultural dimension(culture wars) of US politics before making more predictions.

Get Out The Vote

Potentially in trouble on what grounds????

Btw didja know Clinton himself lost that district in the early years??

+ Means vauge chance of an upset more than anything else. I would doubt that anyone rated + will actually lose their seats.
Think of it as a face saving valve ;)

Thune is saying he will decide and announce int eh next few days if he will enter the House race in SD or the Senate race.

He will problely win either one.

Gosh Senator John Thune sounds so good!

He already should be considering the last election.

Tell me abou tit, I detailed that whole fiasco in here somewhere.  

Thing s I don't dislike Johnson, but HATE DASCHLE and his obstructism.  Then he claims to be so conservative and helpful to SD when he is home and then is Kennedy's best Buddy in DC, arrggghh.

Thune has announced he will not run for the House.

Anyone notice that the Justice Dept.  approved the Texas House map as NOT being against the civil rights act?

Plus the courts won't throw it out now.

At least the delegation from Texas in terms of balance between GOP and Democrats will be more reflective of the true balance between GOP and Democrats.  That the Democrats have more House members than the GOP in Texas always struck me as absurd.  Granted, many of the Democrats are conservative Democrats. Still it stuck me as unfair.

yes this could be a NET gain of 7 seats for the GOP.

Wish they'd get rid of REp. Sheila Jackson Lee, but I think she is still in a safe district.  

Isn't she in central urban district?

She is in the 18th district which is in Houston.

Then that is a Demseat forever.

http://www.dcpoliticalreport.com/Ratings.htm

good site for telling which races are the most competitive.

AZ-02 - GOP Primary - Freshman Rep. Trent Franks vs. Radio Broadcaster Rick
Murphy.

CA-12 - DEM Primary - Rep. Tom Lantos vs. Ro Khanna vs. Maad Abu-Ghazalah.

Ghazalah is a former Libertarian so his candidacy is a non-issue.
However, Mr. Khanna is challenging pro-war democrat Lantos in this VERY liberal
district. He has also been endorsed by the California Democratic Council, making
Lantos the ONLY incumbent democratic congressman NOT to be endorsed.

CA-46 - GOP Primary - Rep. Dana Rohrabacher vs. Bob Dornan.

Rohrabacher is the favorite to win. However, if the main contingent
of GOP March primary voters in this district are social conservatives, Dornan
could win the primary in an upset. If he does, expect this moderate district to
vote for the Democratic nominee in November.

GA-04 - DEM Primary - Rep. Denise Majette vs. fmr. Rep. Cynthia McKinney.

IF McKinney runs, she could make this race interesting but look for
Majette to win again.

IL-02 - DEM Primary - Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. vs. fmr. Rep. Mel Reynolds.

Reynolds was convicted in 1995 of child molestation and obstruction
of justice and Jackson won the subsequent special election. Look for Jackson to
win by a comfortable margin but Reynolds still has some support.

IL-08 - GOP Primary - Rep. Phil Crane vs. Attorney David W. Phelps (NOT the fmr.
Dem Congressman)

Crane was first elected in 1969 and is the senior most member of the
House GOP Caucus. He was turned down last year (AGAIN!) for the Chairmanship of
the Ways & Means Committee and has checked in for alcohol rehab. He has had
close calls before. Will this be the year he's defeated?

IN-04 - GOP Primary - Rep. Steve Buyer vs. fmr. Congressional aide Dennis Hardy

Buyer has recently come under fire for alleged lying about leaving
to go into active duty in Iraq. Will this be his political death knell for
Buyer?

MD-01 GOP Primary - Rep. Wayne Gilchrest vs. State Sen. Richard Colburn

In 2002, the liberal Gilchrest did not-so-well against an unknown
conservative challenger in this socially conservative district. Colburn, a state
senator, should do well in March's primary.

MD-06 - GOP Primary - Rep. Roscoe Bartlett vs. Frederick Co. State's Attorney
Scott Rolle.

Bartlett has a serious challenger in Rolle in this conservative
district. Rolle assails Bartlett for not being as conservative as he claims.

MO-05 - DEM Primary - Rep. Karen McCarthy vs. Foreign Policy Consultant Jamie
Metzl vs. Public Policy Consultant Damian Thorman (so far!)

McCarthy is known for her alleged abuse of staff and high turnover
in her office. She recently checked into rehab and is facing calls to retire.

NJ-05 - GOP Primary - Rep. Scott Garrett vs. state Assemlyman Dave Russo

Garrett, a conservative two-time challenger to fmr. Rep. Marge
Roukema won the 2002 primary with 43% (when Roukema decided to retire) against a
plethora of moderate challengers. Russo, the runner up in the 2002 GOP primary
in this district, may give Garrett a taste of his own medicine when he will
likely be the sole moderate primary challenger to Garrett in this socially
liberal-to-moderate leaning district.

NY-24 - GOP Primary - Rep. Sherwood "Sherry" Boehlert vs. Cayuga Co. legislator
Dr. David Walrath.

Walrath, despite being far behind in campaign monies, almost upset
to moderate-to-liberal Boehlert in last year's primary. Expect funding from
conservative groups next year.

NY-29 - GOP Primary - Rep. Amo Houghton vs. Monroe Co. legislator Mark Assini

The socially liberal Dow chemical scion could face a serious primary
- IF he decides to run for re-election.

PA-09 - GOP Primary - Rep. Bill Shuster vs. business consultant Michael
DelGrosso

Shuster, elected in 2001 to succeed his legendary father, is
embroiled in a possible scandal regarding allegations from a former aide who
alleges he was assigned to spy on DelGrosso's fundraisers and campign functions.

VA-08 DEM Primary - Rep. Jim Moran vs. fmr. congressional aide Andy Rosenburg

Moran found himself in hot water when he was quoted saying
potentially anti-Semetic remarks at a townhall meeting on Iraq. He could lose
his primary in an upset even though bigger hitters have stood down.

---got this off another board--very good list of incumbants being challenged itn eh primaries

Good list but not many will lose.  Maybe B-1 Bob can will.

Looks like good info, What's the link to the source?

no link the guy that did it made the list himself through research.

Files: Calif. Congresswoman Broke Rules    
By ERICA WERNER, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - California Rep. Jane Harman's 1994 campaign for Congress benefited from $21,000 illegally funneled from a Hughes Aircraft Co. fund-raising event, newly released documents show.

The records were made public by the Federal Election Commission (news - web sites) this week after being discovered during a review of closed enforcement cases, a commission spokesman said.

Harman, now the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, was never punished because a federal judge said her campaign didn't commit deliberate or serious violations.

At issue was an Oct. 29, 1993, fund-raiser Hughes held for Harman at its El Segundo, Calif., headquarters. Corporations are prohibited from donating to federal candidates, and the money was given by individual company employees so that it would not violate the law.

However, a Hughes employee collected the money and gave it to Harman's campaign staff, violating a prohibition against corporations acting as "conduits" for contributions, a judge said.

Hughes paid a $40,000 civil penalty to the FEC in 1996 to resolve the matter, the records show.


U.S. District Judge Christina Snyder in August 1999 found that Harman's campaign violated the law but refused the FEC's request for a fine, injunction or demand for repayment. She noted in part that Harman's campaign had apparently relied on incorrect legal advice from a Hughes attorney.


The release of the documents is a belated final chapter to Harman's campaign for a second term in Congress, which she won by a mere 812 votes over Susan Brooks, former mayor of Ranchos Palos Verdes. During the race, Brooks angered Democrats by filing a complaint with the FEC about the Hughes fund-raiser for Harman.


Since then Hughes Aircraft has been sold to Raytheon and Harman has become a leading intelligence authority in Congress, after a two-year break from Washington for an unsuccessful run for governor.

Texas Rep. Hall to Switch to Republicans    

Long overdue; dissapointing, however.

  The news about Rep. Harman may have put her in danger if her district either had its old lines and demographics, but her district in the 90s made a large jump towrds teh Democrats, from giving GHW Bush a 60-39 win in 88 to giving Gore 52% in 2000(under the old lines).

  As for Rep. Hall, he allways has been a nominal Democrat to the point that when it comes to vote counting, he is allways placed as a reliable GOP vote.

Hall voted with the GOP about 80% of the time, I believe.

Texas Rep. Hall to Switch to Republicans    
2 hours, 18 minutes ago  Add Politics - U. S. Congress to My Yahoo!
 

By DAVID ESPO and SUZANNE GAMBOA, AP Special Correspondent

WASHINGTON - Texas Rep. Ralph Hall switched parties Friday night, filing for re-election as a Republican after nearly a quarter-century as one of the most conservative Democrats in Congress.

   

"I've always said that if being a Democrat hurt my district I would switch or I would resign," Hall said in an interview with The Associated Press. He said GOP leaders had recently refused to place money for his district in a spending bill and "the only reason I was given was I was a Democrat."


In an interview in which he said he had filed to run as a Republican, he also said he didn't agree with "all these guys running against the president."


Hall's switch follows a GOP-led drive — bitterly contested by Democrats — to remake Texas' congressional districts more to their liking. Party strategists contend they can gain five or more seats through a mid-decade redistricting, a change that could greatly strengthen their grip on power in the House.


Before Hall's move, the House had 228 Republicans, 205 Democrats, 1 Democrat-leaning independent and 1 vacancy.


In addition to representing a personal change, Hall's defection had historic overtones. His district in Texas includes territory once represented in Congress by the late Sam Rayburn, who served as a Democratic speaker for much of the time between 1940 and 1961.


House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., said he looked forward to working with Hall in the majority party.


"Ralph is a man of courage and a man of great conviction," Hastert said. "Common sense continues to guide him in Washington and now in the Republican Party."


Fellow Texan Tom DeLay, the House majority leader, called Hall on Friday to welcome him to the party.


"Democrats are reaping what they've sown," DeLay said. "Their leaders have lined up behind Howard Dean (news - web sites)'s brand of angry, intolerant politics. They've made their message clear: 'moderates need not apply' and that's a sad trend for a once-great party."


President Bush (news - web sites) also praised Hall.


"I welcome Congressman Ralph Hall to the Republican Party," Bush said. "Ralph is a close friend of the Bush family. He is a well-respected leader of the highest integrity, and a tireless advocate for the people of Texas."


Rep. Martin Frost, Texas' most senior Democrat, declined comment late Friday.


Republican sources, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Hall privately relayed word of his intentions to White House officials and other senior GOP officials earlier in the day.


Hall, 80, was first elected to the House in 1980.


Hall has long been among the most conservative Democrats in Congress. Speculation that he might switch parties first surfaced in 1995, when the GOP gained control of the House for the first time in 40 years.


He said then he wouldn't, arguing that it would be better to try and move the Democratic party toward the middle.

   



Hall's sons, one a Texas judge and the other a lawyer, had been considered possible candidates for their father's congressional seats if Hall resigned. Hall said Friday his party switch would make it easier for his sons to run should he eventually resign, but he added, "Neither of my sons seems interested in coming to Congress."

Democrats have sued to block the new redistricting plan, arguing it violates minority rights. The Justice Department (news - web sites) has approved the plan, and a court ruling on its legality is expected shortly.

Texas Republican Party spokesman Ted Royer said Hall was the 174th elected Texas Democrat to join the Republican Party since 1992.

--makes it a little harder to gain control though for Dems.

So the GOP have picked up a new congressman on paper at least.
In practice he has been a Republican for a very long time...

Glad he's gone.

Soon all the Dems are are going to be hard lefties.

Why are you glad he's gone?

What's with the &#8212 stuff?

There's talk that Cooksey could run against Alexander. I'm not sure how much of a slam dunk that would be, but the divided GOP electorate seriously boosted Alexander.

I'll take your word for it that Burns is the president of the 02 class. It's odd, though, because I figured such an honor was given to congressmen who were good bets for re-election. Jeb Bradley in NH-1 is the secretary of the class and will coast to re-election this year.

Cooksey was very popular there and would probably win it too.

Race Is on to Replace Janklow
 With the South Dakota congressman bowing out after his conviction in a fatal crash, more than a dozen seek the state's U.S. House seat.

 
      Times Headlines  
 
College Aid Is Smart Politics to Democratic Candidates
 
 
Foreign Visitors to U.S. Will Cross Digital Divide
 
 
Photos Show Mars Rover Hit 'Scientific Sweet Spot'
 
 
Inside the 2004 Campaign Tool Chest: Blogs and Online Voting
 
 
Race Is on to Replace Janklow
 
 
more >
 
 
       
 
 
 
 
 JANKLOW WILLIAM J HERSETH STEPHANIE  
 
 SOUTH DAKOTA ELECTIONS  
 
 THE NATION  
 
 SOUTH DAKOTA  
 
 ELECTIONS  
 

 

   
 
 
 
 
 
 
By P.J. Huffstutter, Times Staff Writer


CHICAGO — In the weeks before Christmas, attorney Stephanie Herseth was practically glued to her telephone. She checked in with family. She rang up friends. She hailed her neighbors, her clients, her students at South Dakota State University — even the occasional stranger — with holiday greetings. And with talk of politics.

In the wake of Republican Rep. William J. Janklow's manslaughter conviction last month and his subsequent resignation from Congress, more than a dozen candidates in this rural state have been campaigning for South Dakota's only House seat.

     
 
 
   
     
 
Herseth is one. Her competition includes a farmer, an accountant, a utilities commissioner, a mayor, a state senator and even a retired U.S. congressman.

While the number of candidates is small in comparison to the more than 125 who obtained enough signatures to be on California's recall ballot, it's still a lot for a state that has fewer than half a million registered voters.

"I'm not taking anything for granted," said Herseth, a Democrat who lost the 2002 U.S. House race to Janklow by a few thousand votes. "When I decided to run, I made that decision regardless of who else ran. But the political landscape here is totally different because of what happened last August."

On a hot summer day, on a back road just south of Jank- low's hometown of Flandreau, S.D., the politician ran a stop sign at an estimated 70 mph, striking and killing a 55-year-old motorcyclist.

Janklow, who was found guilty of second-degree manslaughter and three lesser charges, is facing up to 11 years in prison, an $11,000 fine and the end of his political career. His resignation is effective Jan. 20, the day of his sentencing hearing at the Moody County Circuit Courthouse in Flandreau.

However, Janklow's attorney recently filed a motion asking for either a new trial or an acquittal on the manslaughter charge. The document claims prosecutors did not present enough evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Janklow was guilty of the felony charge.

The congressman and his attorney, Ed Evans, declined to comment on the matter.

Few political figures in this state have bothered to distance themselves from Janklow since his legal troubles began. Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.), who was subpoenaed by the defense and testified in the manslaughter case, repeatedly has praised Janklow for the good he accomplished during his tenure as state attorney general and a four-term governor.

"In public life, I would hope that a person is remembered not for the last thing he did, but for the best thing," Daschle said in a statement after the guilty verdict. "I believe that Bill Janklow has done a lot of 'best things.' "

Janklow's departure, however, will leave the state without its only vote in the House until a special election is held June 1. South Dakota law requires that a special election be held within 90 days after a U.S. House member resigns — unless, as is the case with Janklow, that date is within six months of a previously scheduled election.

Voters will decide two issues June 1: The open special election will determine who will serve out Janklow's term. And the state primary that day will determine the Republican and Democratic candidates who will be among those vying for a two-year term that begins in January 2005.

Whoever wins the June special election will be considered the incumbent in the November general election. However, it is possible that the candidate who serves out Janklow's term still could lose on the primary ballot.

State Republican officials say they want to avoid a split in the party at all costs. Back in 1962, the last time South Dakota had a special election, Republican Sen. Francis Case won the party's nomination but died before the general election. The state party was split over who would replace Case, and Democrat George S. McGovern beat the Republicans and won the Senate seat.

Herseth is widely seen as the leading contender for the Democratic special election nomination, which the party is expected to announce by the end of January. The Republican slot — as well as the possibility of a slew of independent candidates — appears to be wide open.

Jeff Partridge, a city councilman in Rapid City, S.D., elected just this year, has begun touting his "conservative approach" to local newspapers. Friends have been talking to Steve Kirby, a former state lieutenant governor, to convince him to run for Congress — and he has started analyzing the competition.

Larry Diedrich, a Republican state senator from Elkton, said he had already started outlining potential campaign stops and budgets.

"It's going to be an odd election," Diedrich said. "This is our California campaign craziness, I suppose."

Regardless of who wins in June, much of South Dakota's political establishment is uneasy about the circumstances that have led to the election.

"It does feel, at times, that we're dancing on graves," said Jason Schulte, executive director for the state Democratic Party. "I'd be lying if I said we didn't feel bad about the fact that a man lost his life, and another man may lose his freedom, for this special election to happen."

No Arizona rematch
    Democrat George Cordova, who lost a close race for a newly created Arizona congressional seat in 2002, will not seek a rematch, party leaders said Monday.
    Many Democrats believed a rematch between Mr. Cordova and Republican Rick Renzi represented the party's best chance to take over the seat, United Press International reports. Mr. Renzi narrowly won the 2002 contest in the state's 1st Congressional District, 49 percent to 46 percent.
    Mr. Cordova's decision clears the way for Coconino County Supervisor Paul Babbitt, brother of former Arizona Gov. Bruce Babbitt, to run unopposed for the party's nomination.
     

The current Rothenberg Political Report has an analysis of Senate, House and Governor races.  A subscription is needed to see the analysis, but all the competitive House races are listed at the free site.  As of Jan 10, only 17 Republican and 15 Democratic seats are listed as competitive.  With such a small number of competitive seats it is unlikely the Democrats can win control of the House.  Given the new TX redistricting the Republicans will very likely expand their control.
see:
http://www.rothenbergpoliticalreport.com/

Texas has made sure the Dems will not take the house.

The Texas Gerrymander in theory acts as a safeguard for the GOP. The Dems might make some strong gains elsewhere, but because of the Texan plan, will struggle to get the GOP majority below 5.

There is no place in the country where they can get 14 seats to get with in five.

You'd have to see a huge anti-Bush tide to get there. There are enough districts split 40-40 and a fight for the middle 20 that it could happen. It would have to be a totally one-sided election result.

You'd boot out Heather Wilson, Anne Northup, Charlie Bass, the Iowa GOP delegation, freshmen like Virginia Brown-Waite, Republicans in Gore seats like Gerlach, Johnson, Simmons and so on.

Er... you all seem to be misinterpreting me...

What I mean is that IF the Dems can make strong/solid gains elsewhere they would still struggle to get the GOP's majority below 5 seats in the House, due to the Texan map.

Sorry then.

Good site, thanks.

as to person about IA delegation.  They are safe seats, dems tried last time hard and were all defeated soundly.  They may have a chance in 2006 as Rep King ( west IA) and Nussle , budget chairman  I think, wboth have expressed interest in running for Governor.

Your right in Iowa the best chance for Dems was 2002.

From article:


The middle?? Hall was more conservative than most Northeastern Republicans and even some Sun Belt Republicans.


Actually, I think Hall had said that as a Democrat he might have voted for Hastert if he was the deciding vote.

Hall was just about the most conservative Democrat since Thurmond switched to the GOP...
A Democrat in name only, now a Republican because he was afraid of losing his seat.

If he wants to die in Congress as a Republican, that's fine with me. The TX-GOP and the NRCC can spend the money on some other race.

2002 was a good year for the GOP. If you had a similarly bad year for the GOP, some could fall.

I've no problem with Hall crossing the floor, and to be honest he should have done it years ago.

I think if he thought there was a chance that the party would go in Lieberman's direction and not Dean's, there wasn't anything peculiar about waiting.

You just se eit in the South, Dems are discouraged.  You have 5 people retiring as they know that their party will not gaint he majority int he Senate.  

Next int eh House Hall tried to move them more center, but failed.  Seeing that the Dems would be int he minority for along period , plus redistrcting he bolted.

I think of the true retirements (not those leaving for higher races), the Dems are way behind of the GOP. I can't understand why there aren't more Dems retiring.

Bobby Jindal is looking to restart his Louisiana political career...

Bobby and Supriya Jindal have put their Highland Road home on the market and have bought a house in Kenner.  The unsuccessful Republican candidate for governor is making the move with an eye toward running in the First Congressional District this fall. A source close to him said he will state his intentions by the end of the month.

DC Politics is the only site I've found that predicts every race, using a 5 star system 1* boringly safe to 5***** very exciting.

http://www.dcpoliticalreport.com/Ratings.htm

So far he has picked 4 seats to go from R to D (the two specials SD and KY-6) and GA 11 and GA12.  In contrast the only D seats to switch to R are three new TX seats, but the TX seats have not been updated since the final filings last Friday.

Sears bids to challenge (VA Congessman) Scott in a David vs. Goliath battle
Virginian-Pilot | Katrice Hardy

RICHMOND -- Not far from the state Capitol building where she made history three years ago, former Del. Winsome E. Sears announced Monday that she will challenge U.S. Rep. Robert C. "Bobby" Scott for the 3rd Congressional District seat this fall. Sears is a Republican. Scott is a Democrat.


Flanked by her three teenage daughters, her husband and Attorney General Jerry H. Kilgore, Sears said that Scott has lost touch with the beliefs of his constituents.

The congressional seat is in a majority-black district that stretches from Richmond to Norfolk. About 57 percent of its residents are black.

Scott believes that America should support same-sex marriages, Sears said. He also has voted against strengthening the nation's borders, she said.

"I want what you want, a voice in Washington that truly represents the people" Sears said. "I am saying that we can do better. We must do better. We will do better, and I will do better, and that's why I'm running."

The former Marine and Norfolk resident said her political track record qualifies her to serve in Congress. And she says she can challenge a "Goliath," Sears said, referring to how some people view Scott.

"Yes, that Goliath is big, but still he's just a man," Sears said.

Scott was unavailable for comment Monday.

good site.

So he is predicting the dems to pick up sezats int he house though?  Odd.

He is a Democrat and his predictions usually lean that way.  He tries to be balanced though and will usually add other predictions (Crystal Ball, etc.) on the page.  However that usually just makes his bias more obvious :)

Yeah I like Crystal ball about the best.  seems fair.  Not sure if you are signed up for Sabato's e-mails, but he has updated presidential race thoughts after yesterday.  Plus delegate counts and such.

Lampson is not running against DeLay.
Were's the drama gone dammit!

yeah no chance for a whooping! :)

I'm embarrassed to admit I hail from Gephart's district.  Alas, I think its safe Democrat, but does anyone know which Dem is going to be installed now that he's going away?  (btw, what a relief)

Sessions, Frost keep gloves on
 
1st joint appearance by District 32 candidates is a polite peek at issues


08:29 AM CST on Monday, January 26, 2004
 

By DAVE LEVINTHAL / The Dallas Morning News
 


In detailing their divisions on civil liberties and the role of the federal government, Congressmen Pete Sessions and Martin Frost on Sunday foreshadowed the key issues of their nationally notable campaign-in-the-making.

Their participation in a political issues breakfast forum at Temple Emanu-El in Dallas marked the first time the congressmen appeared together in public since Mr. Frost, a 13-term Arlington Democrat, announced Jan. 16 that he would challenge Mr. Sessions, a four-term Dallas Republican, for the District 32 seat.

"The poorest of the poor have color TVs ... indoor plumbing," Mr. Sessions said, disputing a question about the economic gap between the wealthiest and poorest Americans becoming historically wide.

Government should help poor people through a combination of tax cuts and economic incentives that keep interest rates low and create quality jobs for them, Mr. Sessions said. He also said he would support a flat tax over graduated taxes based on income.

Mr. Frost said that the poorest Americans often need direct government intervention to succeed.

"Government has a role to play. We want no one left behind in this country," Mr. Frost said.

Both congressmen said they support, in principle, the USA Patriot Act, which Congress passed months after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks to combat foreign terrorism. Critics say the government uses its provisions to violate U.S. citizens' civil rights.

"We cannot let our country become a police state," Mr. Frost said, adding that law enforcement agencies have sometimes abused the act.

"It's in the public interest and the public good," Mr. Sessions said of the Patriot Act. "I don't think we have something to fear."

They also differed on health care issues, with Mr. Frost panning the recent passage of a Republican-backed plan as a failure to adequately lower prescription drug costs. Mr. Sessions supports the plan.

But considering this race's importance and their disagreements, the joint appearance was a genteel affair, at times bordering on breezy.

Mr. Frost and Mr. Sessions mugged together with nervous Boy Scouts for camera-toting fathers. They chatted off-microphone before and after the discussion.

And overt campaign rhetoric? Save for a couple of redistricting jokes delivered by Mr. Frost, it was practically nonexistent, at least in the presence of more than 250 people at the early-morning eggs-and-orange juice forum.

"This was official business, not campaigning," Mr. Sessions said, adding that he agreed to participate in October, three months before Mr. Frost announced his intentions. "It was casual, educational – an opportunity to inform."

Said Mr. Frost: "This is just an opportunity for [voters] to get to know who we are."

Statements such as these are a steep departure from the congressmen's virulent talk of two weeks ago. Then Mr. Sessions deemed Mr. Frost a "hard-core liberal," and Mr. Frost promised that "this will be one of the most contested, interesting races across the entire country."

After the forum, Mr. Frost twice noted that he voted for the Republican-backed "No Child Left Behind" education act, while Mr. Sessions did not.

Mr. Sessions, in turn, proclaimed, "I have no Achilles' heel" among the racial, ethnic and religious groups in Republican-leaning 32nd District, which includes sections of Oak Cliff, Irving, Richardson, North Dallas, University Park and Highland Park.

"My wife is Hispanic. I'm close with the Jewish and Asian populations here," Mr. Sessions said. "We will split the Jewish vote."

Mr. Frost is the only Jewish Texan ever elected to Congress. Mr. Sessions is a Methodist.

Both men predicted that they would raise and spend at least $2.5 million each during the campaign – a conservative estimate, political consultants say. Mr. Sessions said he would report about $750,000 cash on hand when federal campaign finance filings become public at month's end. Mr. Frost will report about $700,000, he said.

When a federal court upheld the Legislature's congressional redistricting map this month, Mr. Frost found himself drawn out of his domain, District 24.

Can he win District 32?

"No," said Stephen Shore, a temple member and Frost supporter, who then backed off his prediction. "It's a long, hard fight between now and November. We'll see, won't we?"

Not sure about "like" or "fair", but Fairvote.org have been predicting every house race since 1996 (inclusive) and have got it wrong exactly once. They have a too close to call option, which makes that easier...
They also have expected minimum margins, which usually include only a small handful of errors.
You'd have to look through a lot of talk on election reform that you might not like though...As that is their main aim.

Fairvote.org have got some good stuff on there site.
"Too close to call" is essential for making accurate predictions.

Make every prediction 'too close to call'... :)

I do that anyway :)

Correction on Fairvote.org
Problem is, I used that site a lot in 2002 and hadn't come back since. They posted a preliminary prediction for 2004 in December 2002. Their predictions are based purely on a mathematical model, so that's possible. However, predictions would have to change wherever
- an incumbent resigns, dies, retires, is defeated in a primary
- the contender also has a record of running for the house from that district
- and of course, when a state gets re-gerrymandered.
They said they'd update the prediction as these things happen. They haven't got started doing it yet...They'll probably do well in time before the election, but as of the moments their predictions are in a number of cases worthless.

It's official. Jindal wants to start back on the road to statewide office in Louisiana...

Jindal to seek Vitter's congressional seat
The Associated Press
29 Jan 2004
By DOUG SIMPSON

METAIRIE, La. (AP) — Former state and federal health official Bobby Jindal said Thursday he will run for the U.S. House seat now held by fellow Republican David Vitter, who is running for the Senate.

Vitter, who hopes to succeed retiring Democrat John Breaux, joined Jindal and endorsed his candidacy during a news conference at Grace King High School.

Jindal, who lost to Kathleen Blanco in last year's runoff in the race for governor, recently announced that he was moving his family from Baton Rouge to Kenner in the 1st Congressional District.

"When God closes one door, he opens another. I understand there's a job opening here," Jindal said.

The district covers much of suburban New Orleans and is a Republican stronghold.

State Rep. Steve Scalise, R-Jefferson, has also declared his candidacy for the seat and Rep. A.G. Crowe, R-Pearl River, is expected to announce whether he will run on Monday.

A spokesman for former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke, now serving a federal prison term for bilking supporters and cheating on his taxes, said Duke might also make the race, although it would be difficult to raise sufficient campaign money. Duke finished third when he ran for the seat in a 1999 election.

"I don't think David Duke represents the best of what this district has to offer," Jindal, the son of Indian immigrants, said when asked about a possible candidacy by the white supremacist.

Jindal said he would offer an official platform later but said he already knows that he will focus on five areas:

_ support of President Bush's war on terrorism.

_ health care improvements.

_ controlling government spending.

_ social issues including his anti-abortion stance.

_ promoting improvements in the district including attracting jobs, protecting military bases, flood control and coastal erosion.

Dunn says she won't seek return to Congress
Seattle Times
Friday, January 30, 2004
Associated Press


OLYMPIA — U.S. Rep. Jennifer Dunn, Washington state's senior Republican in Congress and a favorite of the Bush White House, told The Associated Press tonight that she's retiring from politics.

Dunn, 61, who had been courted by President Bush to run for the U.S. Senate this fall, said she has decided to serve out her sixth House term and then retire from public life.

She cited family considerations — she's newly remarried — and a desire for one more career after politics. She endorsed no successor in her Republican-leaning 8th District in Seattle's eastern suburbs.


"It's time for me to move on, probably to the private sector," she said in an interview. "It's hard. It's hard to think of giving it up. It has been such a positive thing in my life. But at some time, I will have to. This feels like the time."

Dunn was chairwoman of the state Republican Party for a decade before winning her congressional seat in 1992. The Bellevue native was regularly re-elected by large margins, and had been a heavy favorite to win again this year. She already had amassed a warchest of about $1.5 million.

------------------

Info on the probable Dem nominee from last September. This will probably be a Dem pick-up.

Dunn draws challenger from high-tech world: Mercer Island attorney running for U.S. House
King County Journal
9-3-03
Chris Winters


Former computer industry executive Alex Alben has launched a bid to unseat U.S. Rep. Jennifer Dunn in the 8th congressional district. Dunn has held the seat for 12 years.

The 45-year-old Mercer Island resident said he'll emphasize jobs and economic growth in his campaign.

Alben said he has the right combination of business sense and progressive values that will resonate in the 8th, which ranges from Bellevue to Mount Rainier National Park, including Issaquah, Sammamish, Mercer Island and part of Redmond and Renton.

He's an intellectual property attorney who spent 10 years in the local high-tech industry, most recently as vice president of public policy at RealNetworks Inc. He also favors of environmental protection and women's rights.

``That mix really describes that district, and that's me,'' Alben said.

He's also a mountain climber, an apt metaphor given the competition he's going up against.

Dunn, 61, has handily won re-election in the largely Republican district, defeating Democrat Heidi Behrens-Benedict, a Bellevue interior designer, in each of the past three elections.

An influential senior member of her caucus, she has serving as a member of the Ways and Means Committee, vice chairwoman of the new Homeland Security Committee and a member of the caucus campaign team. She was the top choice of her party and the White House to challenge Sen. Patty Murray next year, but she declined. ``It just makes sense, when you look at where you can best use your skills, influence, time and clout,'' Dunn explained at the time.

Dunn also is a seasoned fund-raiser who is well-connected to the Bush Administration. As of June 30, she had approximately $1.1 million in the bank.

Alben thinks Dunn is vulnerable this time.

``She's a party loyalist. She voted with Tom DeLay 95 percent of the time in the last Congress,'' he said, referring to the GOP House majority leader.

By contrast, he said he's not a politician, and would do what's best for the district, regardless of what the party chairman thinks.

``I come at things from a business point of view and from being a dad with school age kids,'' he said. Dunn has two adult children.

Alben said he plans to spend $2 million on the campaign, but didn't directly answer when asked if he'll self-fund the effort, as his old RealNetworks colleague Maria Cantwell did in her winning Senate bid in 2000.

He said he wrote out a $100,000 check to kickstart the campaign.

Danielle Holland, Dunn's spokeswoman, declined to comment on Alben's race.

Alben is also staking out campaign territory in education, proposing to bring federal funds to Washington to support students seeking advanced degrees in certain sectors, fully funding Head Start programs, and expanding scholarship programs.

``I am dancing on my desk over Alex Alben,'' said Paul Berendt, the state Democratic Party chairman. ``He's a five-star candidate and he's just the type of person we really need to win in this district.''

Berendt said that this year would be the year of the nonpolitician, and that despite Dunn's strengths, voters will be looking for a fresh perspective.

``It's not going to be easy to defeat her, but I believe people are tired of politicians who are putting their own careers in front of the district,'' Berendt said, referring to rumors of Dunn seeking lobbying jobs.

``We just believe that the Republican Congress is out of touch with people,'' Berendt said. ``We need to get people to represent us who are in touch with the real world.''

For others, Dunn's hold on her seat is not in doubt.

``Anybody looking to run against Jennifer Dunn must have a political death wish,'' said Brett Bader, a Republican strategist with Madison Communications.

``She's an outstanding fund-raiser,'' Bader said, ``Her popularity is a combination of popularity at home and popularity back East among the powers that be.''

``The mountain is too tall to climb,'' he said.

Alben is a graduate of Stanford University and its law school. A New York native, he's been in Washington 11 years, and has worked as general counsel and vice president for business development at Paul Allen's StarWave and most recently as an executive at RealNetworks. His wife, Ellen, is a lawyer and they have two children.

said heavily republican district, so safe seat right?

I suppose that means in terms of registration. We're talking the rich eastern edge of the Seattle-Tacoma area here. Traditional Republican territory, but voted for Al Gore in 2000. Not exactly a safe seat then. Not a certain Dem pickup either, though. It should depend on who runs for the Republicans.

Tauzin Quits Chairmanship, Will Retire From House

By Frank Ahrens
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, February 4, 2004; Page A09

W.J. "Billy" Tauzin (La.), one of the most powerful Republicans in the House, will not seek reelection when his 12th term expires at the end of this year and will vacate the chairmanship of the Energy and Commerce Committee effective Feb. 16.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10138-2004Feb3.html

LA-3 voted for Bush 52%-45% in 2000.  It's an ancestrally Democratic district, but culturally conservative.

LA-3 is gainable... It was Gore's 2nd best district in LA in 2000.

DC's Political Report predictions:

()

so dems are going to pick up seats int he house?  I don't think so.

The dcpoliticalreport predictions seem to be a little bit biased towards the Dems (which is not to say that these are Dem-made predictions, I don't know about that). They also predict no change in the senate.
In the House, they predict that the Dems will keep all 5 TX districts that are getting seriously fought over, giving the state a 17-15 Rep delegation. This is possible but in my opinion unlikely - as is the Reps gaining all five of 'em.
If it came to pass it would be highly ironic - all the TX gerrymander would have achieved is disillusioning a few people about politics, punishing the city of Austin for being so friggin liberal and gaining one seat. Oh yeah, and finally getting Ralph Hall to acknowledging he's republican.

Sachs' is a Democrat but the site is quite balanced and the only time any bias appears is when a race is a 50-50 tossup.
Unlike most stuff on the internet...

I'm not letting anyone say anything nasty about him as he represented miners with silicosis in several court cases.

That's good.
I didn't mean as compared to typical partisan spinster stuff. Of course it's way more balanced than that. It's just that I considered his predictions as slightly overoptimistic (or overpessimistic, had he been a Republican)

bump

What's your fascination with 13 year old atlas threads?

fyi there is a rule against excessive grave-digging with no apparent purpose.

guess the spree is over!