The Hill: When majorities are thin, the switchers can be kings

[Adlai Stevenson]

When majorities are thin, the switchers can be kings
By Josephine Hearn

With House Democrats expecting to narrow their 15-seat gap with Republicans in November, members of both parties are considering the uncomfortable but all-too-plausible reality that control of the House could hinge on the party affiliation of just a few members – or perhaps only one.

Such a scenario puts additional pressure on the moderates on each side of the aisle — many of whom could face pressure to jump across and join the other team. Still, with less than two months to go before the midterm elections, those few Democrats who switched sides in recent years are standing by their decisions and say they have no regrets even though they are again facing the possibility of life in the minority.

“I enjoy being a member of Congress in the minority or the majority,” said Rep. Rodney Alexander (R-La.), whose 2004 defection was called “cowardly” and “an act of perfidy” by Democrats. “The national agenda of the Democrats was not something I believed in. Some of my Blue Dog friends continue to pick on me to come home!”

Alexander received a spot on the powerful Appropriations Committee shortly after he joined the Republicans.

Rep. Ralph Hall (R-Texas), the most conservative Democrat in the House before he jumped ship in 2004, expressed similar sentiments.

“I’m very happy where I am. I made the right decision,” Hall said. “I just made it 10 years too late. I made it without any rancor toward the Democrats.”

Republicans rewarded Hall with the chairmanship of the Energy and Air Quality Subcommittee of the Energy and Commerce Committee. Former Rep. Billy Tauzin (R-La.), one of the best-known party switchers, was lured to the GOP by an offer to chair the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Rep. Nathan Deal (R-Ga.), who changed sides in 1995, said he has no regrets “whatsoever.”

“The issue is where you are and where your people are on the issues ... that was what made the decision for me,” he said.

Despite these expressions of confidence, pressure could mount after the election. In a House divided 218 to 217, just a single disgruntled member of the majority could deal the ultimate blow to his or her colleagues, an act of betrayal similar to when Sen. Jim Jeffords’s (I-Vt.) left the Republican party in 2001 and handed the Senate over to the Democrats

Party switching is rare, happening most frequently after a turnover in majority power. Four Democratic House members and two Democratic senators switched to the Republican party in 1995 after Republicans took over the House and Senate.

Party switchers are often lured by offers of plum panel assignments or by a general feeling that they don’t belong in their party. Many are at the fringes of their caucus or conference, too conservative for the Democrats or too liberal for Republicans.

Republicans have periodically courted Democratic Reps. Bud Cramer (Ala.) and Colin Peterson (Minn.) and former Rep. Ken Lucas (D-Ky.), now a Democratic candidate. They also are among the most likely to buck their leaders on votes.

Cramer voted with his party only 60 percent of the time in 2005, reportedly second only to freshman Rep. Dan Boren (D-Okla.) at 59 percent. Peterson sided with Democrats 64 percent of the time, followed by Rep. Gene Taylor (D-Miss.) at 65 percent, Rep. Lincoln Davis (D-Tenn.) at 67 percent and Utahan Rep. Jim Matheson (D) at 69 percent.

Democratic strategists said that, after 12 years in the minority, they felt that all the members who would contemplate switching have already made their move. In recent years, nearly all party switchers have gone from Democrat to Republican, seeking more power in the majority.

As Hall demonstrated, party switchers have often been ideologically at odds with their party.

On the Republican side, a handful of members also have been consistent party critics and could become party-switching targets themselves if Democrats takeover with only a slim majority.

Rep. Jim Leach (R-Iowa) voted only 63 percent of the time with the GOP in 2005. His district backed Democratic Sen. John Kerry (Mass.) for president with 55 percent.

Rep. Chris Shays (R-Conn.) supported his leadership 67 percent of the time. He is battling a fierce challenge in Democratic-leaning Connecticut.

Another Connecticut Republican facing a tough challenge this year is Rep. Rob Simmons. He voted with Republicans 74 percent. Other GOP moderates include Reps. Mike Castle (Del.) and Mike Fitzpatrick (Pa.) at 76 percent.

“The fact is there are always going to be members on either side in closely contested districts who believe they could switch and end any electoral problems they’ve been having. Then there are the people who just want to be on good committees,” said Democratic strategist Steve Elmendorf. “It’s a very small pool of people who might switch, but that might be all you need.”


http://www.hillnews.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/092006/majorities.html

[RBH]

Gene Taylor is too much of a free thinker to switch sides.

Collin Peterson just got a pretty good spot commitee-wise.

Dan Boren has family in the Democratic party.

The biggest drama with a 218/217 split is "Would Gene Taylor vote for Pelosi for Speaker?"

Taylor voted for John Murtha for Speaker in 2001, 2003, and 2005.

[Gustaf]

I don't think this will be an issue: all Democrats who wanted to switch have already done so and most Republicans who might contemplate it will probably be kicked out in the election (or mad about almost being defeated )

[Mr. Morden]

Ah ha!  I was ahead of my time. 

I raised this very issue in this forum last month:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=43884.0

[Nym90]

I agree that I don't see anyone switching sides.

Leach would be the best chance for the GOP probably. For the Democrats, Cramer would be the most likely. However, I still don't think either would make the jump.

I agree that pretty much every Democrat who was going to jump would've already done so by now. If someone like Cramer was willing to spend 12 years in the minority, why would he go now? The obvious answer would be if the GOP offered him a plum committee chairmanship if the election results are 218-217 in favor of the Dems, though obviously the Democrats would probably make him plenty of good offers too to keep him.

I'd say Leach would be the single most likely, if the House is evenly divided or if it goes narrowly to the Democrats. Party switches are almost always towards the party that is gaining and away from the one that is losing seats.

In the case of Taylor, he could use his leverage to demand the Democrats choose a different Speaker, but I can't possibly see him voting for Hastert.

Interesting that he voted for Murtha, though, considering how liberal he is portrayed by some on this Forum.

[Mr. Morden]

In the case of Taylor, he could use his leverage to demand the Democrats choose a different Speaker, but I can't possibly see him voting for Hastert.

That's an excellent point.  Remember how Gingrich was ousted back in 1998.  The GOP had just a 5 seat margin in the newly elected House, so just 5 members insisting that they would not vote for Gingrich for Speaker, but *would* vote for another Republican for the job was enough to force him to step down.  If the new House has just a 1 seat margin for either party, then it would only take *one* person to hold the entire caucus hostage.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Leach would be the best chance for the GOP probably. For the Democrats, Cramer would be the most likely.

No, he's stuck with the Democrats all this time, he would've switched already. Also he is far to the left of the Alabama Republican Party, even though he is quite conservative for a Democrat.

[agcatter]

The more I think about it, the more I think it is unlikely that a member will switch - the backlash from the member's former party would be too great. 

That said, I can't see Taylor voting for Pelosi.  He may abstain or may vote for some other Dem - (not Murtha BTW, Murtha has spewed a lot of anti military rhetoric since Taylor last voted for him and Taylor is VERY pro military).  It is in the relm of possibility that we could be looking at a tie for Speaker with multiple ballots.  In that case, an understanding would have to be reached between Taylor and Pelosi before she would get his vote.  Same might be true of Leach (or some NE Republican) for Hastert to secure the same for his side..

[Mr. Morden]

On The Chris Matthews Show just now, Katty Kay said that her sources indicate that two members of Congress who are currently Republicans, but used to be Democrats, have already had some informal discussions with the Democratic leadership about switching back, depending on the outcome of the election.  Matthews said that he's heard the same thing.  How many Republican members of Congress are former Democrats?  The list can't be very big, so the identities of these folks can't be too much of a secret.

[Adlai Stevenson]

Former Democratic Members of Congress Who Are Now Republicans:

Nathan Deal (GA-10); Elected 1992, Switched 1995
Rodney Alexander (LA-5); Elected 2002, Switched 2004
Ralph Hall (TX-4); Elected 1980, Switched 2004

I think these three are the only ones. 

[Nym90]

If two former Dems are considering going back, Alexander and Deal would be the most likely. I can't possibly see Hall switching back.

Alexander would be the one who would be most likely to return, but that would seem to really make them look like flipfloppers and opportunists. I don't think anyone has ever changed from one party to another and then made another switch back to the party they've originally left (Congressional historians, please prove me wrong if I am...).

[Adlai Stevenson]

I think you're right that it would make them look very opportunistic.  But I don't know who it could be.

Alexander seems the most likely since he only switched two years ago. 

Hall spent twenty-four years as an elected Democrat and is 83 years old, why would he switch and go back? 

But then again Deal switched eleven years ago, why should he now want to go back?  Also he represents a 77% Bush District. 

[Gustaf]

Churchill switched from the Tories to the Liberals and then back again. There is a Swedish MEP who switched from M to FP to KD. But I don't know of any American cases.

[Nym90]

I just remembered Virgil Goode in Virginia is another former Dem who is still in office as a Republican. He might be the second one along with Alexander.

[Torie]

If two former Dems are considering going back, Alexander and Deal would be the most likely. I can't possibly see Hall switching back.

Alexander would be the one who would be most likely to return, but that would seem to really make them look like flipfloppers and opportunists. I don't think anyone has ever changed from one party to another and then made another switch back to the party they've originally left (Congressional historians, please prove me wrong if I am...).

Interesting question. If there are two that are thinking of switching, I agree it is Goode and Alexander. Deal has too GOP a seat. If the House partisan balance is really tight, it may well be that some Dem other than Pelosi will be Speaker. I don't see Goode and Alexander switching to do a a Pelosi, and Taylor might do a Taylor, along maybe with Cramer.

[Mr. Morden]

It's also possible that folks like Goode or Alexander could simply be pretending that they might consider switching so that both parties would try to win their allegiance by offering them pork for their districts or good committee assignments or something along those lines.  Talk like this could scare the GOP into offering them such things in order to prevent them from switching.  A similar dynamic played out when Jim Traficant started talking about voting for Hastert for Speaker.  Traficant got a bill passed with pork for his district, and there was support from both parties, because neither of them wanted to alienate him.

[RBH]

Voteview has a Party Unity score, for matters where a majority of the Dems were on one side and a majority of Republicans were on the other.

That party unity score says that Deal voted with the majority of the GOP on 561 of 564 votes in the 108th Congress (2003-2005).

(The House had 1221 roll calls in that Congress too)

But Deal's not coming back.

How about Hall's scores, pre and post switch.

Hall sided with the Democrats for 176 of 345 votes (51%), then he sided with the GOP for 231 of 251 votes (92%).

Jim Leach's unity scores from the 104th to 108th: 76%, 68%, 71%, 72%, 65%

Connie Morella scored under 50% for several years.

Gene Taylor, from the 104th to 108th: 43%, 43%, 50%, 60%, 69%

[Adlai Stevenson]

I think its kind of interesting and somewhat surprising that all the potential party switchers under consideration are conservative Republicans now.  Its strange that of the few moderate Republicans there are more are not discussed as party switchers.  Leach has been in Congress since 1976; why wouldn't he have switched in the eighteen years the Democrats were in the majority?