TX-07: Competitive or not?

[MarkWarner08]

First, IL-14 fell. Then went LA-06 and MS-01. Now House Republicans are preparing for a political apocalypse. House Republican strategic genius Tom Davis says Democrats could surprise Republicans by winning several seats that weren't on the target boards at the beginning of the year. Could TX-07 be one such district?

It features a four term incumbent who has never faced a viable challenger. Congressman John Culberson saw his victory margin fall from 31% in 2004 to 21% in 2006. Early this year, Democrats recruited Michael Skelly, a clean energy entrepreneur  to challenge Culberson.  Skelly stunned political pundits and even party insiders by raising over $750k in the first quarter of 2008. This figure is the highest amount ever raised by a  non-self funding  novice Democratic House candidate.

Although Skelly has a 2.58-1 cash on hand advantage over incumbent Culberson, Skelly insists that he'll also tap his vast personal resources if the race tightens. Besides the fundraising prowess of Skelly, this race might be competitive because of the changing demographics of TX-07. This very affluent district gave Bush a stunning 69% of the vote in 2000, over eight points higher than his statewide total. Four years later, TX-07 voted 64% for Bush, a five point decline while Bush's national vote share rose four points. The decline is likely caused by the national trend of wealthy suburban areas shifting away from voting on economic issues (read: supporting Republicans) and instead voting on social issues.

Will this and the weak state of the House GOP brand be enough to put TX-07 in play?  Since I'll be living in this district for the next four years, I hope the answer is a resounding yes.

[Meeker]

If the current mood holds, yes.

[Lief 🗽]

Eh, I doubt it, but one can certainly hope.

Interestingly, TX-7 was Daddy Bush's old Congressional seat.

[Sam Spade]

No, but a challenger with money should make it more interesting than normal, especially in terms of advertising.  I'm guessing it can be gotten closer than 59%-38%, but how much more, I dunno. 

If I know the CD well enough, most of the swing in recent years has occurred in the inside the loop areas.  You will find it interesting to note that the NE corner of that CD is the trendy Midtown area, which has grown like gangbusters in the past few years with annoying yuppie types who, of course, tend to vote more liberal.  The Vietnamese are also stationed in that area, comprising most of the Asian contingent.  Montrose, the home of the gays, is also in this CD, as is Meyerland, to the south of Bellaire, home to Houston's Jewish population.  The small black community here is just south of Meyerland.  The Hispanics appear in different sorts of areas, some inside the loop, some populating along with whites outside the loop, especially north of I-10.

The problem is, of course, the outside-the-loop areas (in general).  They contain the typical sort of straight-ticket suburban Republican that has shown no interest in moving either in 2004 or afterwards. (see Jersey Village area, especially, also along 6).  I should point out, for my own amusement, Spring Branch, which is in this CD, just south of I-10, outside the loop.  Although more unknown than River Oaks, its population is quite frankly about as rich as River Oaks, but tends to act more like suburban Republicans, rather than country club Republicans (as does River Oaks).  Just a little oddity

The swing here in the 2006 wave was about similar to the Texas-statewide swing, which smells about right to me, given the factors labeled above.  I pause to remind you that few blacks live here and fewer college students live here, present company notwithstanding.  Your hope is to create a mammoth swing among the inside-the-loopers and I guess try to swing a few outside the loopers?  Probably a lost cause in a Prez election, as I suspect the Bush-McCain swing (as should be expected in Texas) is less than most other CDs and more importantly, the nasty convenience of straight-ticket voting.

Hope this answers a few questions.

EDIT:  Had a brain fart and confused Culberson with someone else on a point, so I'm editing this out.

[Sam Spade]

Eh, I doubt it, but one can certainly hope.

Interestingly, TX-7 was Daddy Bush's old Congressional seat.

40 years ago, this area (along with the German Hill Country and the rich Dallas suburbs - both smaller in population) was the only Republican part of Texas, literally. 

Of course, the area in TX-07 that is outside the loop was still mainly rural at that time.

[JSojourner]

I think it stays R.  But Sam is right -- the right Democrat with enough money could make it interesting.

[Adlai Stevenson]

There are quite a few of the originally Republican Districts that could swing Democratic I think.  Not just TX-7, but also TX-6, TX-32, TX-31, TX-26, TX-24, TX-21, TX-10 (Definitely a possibilty IMO), and possibly TX-5.  A lot of Texan Republicans underperfomed, or seemed to, in 2006 though.

[Sam Spade]

I think it stays R.  But Sam is right -- the right Democrat with enough money could make it interesting.

If by interesting in the present environment with the worst-case scenario, 55-45, then I agree...    Once again, there are too many suburban Rs here.

[Sam Spade]

There are quite a few of the originally Republican Districts that could swing Democratic I think.  Not just TX-7, but also TX-6, TX-32, TX-31, TX-26, TX-24, TX-21, TX-10 (Definitely a possibilty IMO), and possibly TX-5.  A lot of Texan Republicans underperfomed, or seemed to, in 2006 though.

Do you think perhaps this might be because it was a wave election?

[Mr.Phips]

Probably not.  I would be surprised if Skelley got more than 42%.  The district Democrats should be focusing on taking in Texas is TX-32.  Bush got his lowest % there in any Republican held district and it is half minority(8% black, 4% Asian, and 36% Hispanic). 

[JSojourner]

I think it stays R.  But Sam is right -- the right Democrat with enough money could make it interesting.

If by interesting in the present environment with the worst-case scenario, 55-45, then I agree...    Once again, there are too many suburban Rs here.

Yepyep -- enough maybe to make the Republican sweat as the early returns come in but probably not enough to keep him up past nine!

[Adlai Stevenson]

There are quite a few of the originally Republican Districts that could swing Democratic I think.  Not just TX-7, but also TX-6, TX-32, TX-31, TX-26, TX-24, TX-21, TX-10 (Definitely a possibilty IMO), and possibly TX-5.  A lot of Texan Republicans underperfomed, or seemed to, in 2006 though.

Do you think perhaps this might be because it was a wave election?

Of course, but then again its not hard to imagine Democrats becoming competetive in some of those districts sooner or later.  Particularly perhaps TX-7, TX-10 and TX-32. 

[Sam Spade]

Probably not.  I would be surprised if Skelley got more than 42%.  The district Democrats should be focusing on taking in Texas is TX-32.  Bush got his lowest % there in any Republican held district and it is half minority(8% black, 4% Asian, and 36% Hispanic). 

Well, the question with the Hispanics, as always, is whether they are legal citizens, and whether they will actually show up. 

You can always eliminate, at minimum, about 20% from the Hispanic total based on citizenship alone.  And then there's turnout, which really needs a Hispanic-surnamed candidate in order to have effect. 

Moreover, if my East End contacts in Houston are correct, don't expect them to turn up in any great numbers for Obama.  The blacks will certainly show up this election, though.    And you will have the slight advantage of SMU being in this CD.

[Sam Spade]

I think it stays R.  But Sam is right -- the right Democrat with enough money could make it interesting.

If by interesting in the present environment with the worst-case scenario, 55-45, then I agree...    Once again, there are too many suburban Rs here.

Yepyep -- enough maybe to make the Republican sweat as the early returns come in but probably not enough to keep him up past nine!

Depends on where the early votes come in from.  And Mr. Phips is right now that I think about it - 42% is probably the best that can occur, keeping in mind the Libertarian will probably take a couple of %.

[Sam Spade]

There are quite a few of the originally Republican Districts that could swing Democratic I think.  Not just TX-7, but also TX-6, TX-32, TX-31, TX-26, TX-24, TX-21, TX-10 (Definitely a possibilty IMO), and possibly TX-5.  A lot of Texan Republicans underperfomed, or seemed to, in 2006 though.

Do you think perhaps this might be because it was a wave election?

Of course, but then again its not hard to imagine Democrats becoming competetive in some of those districts sooner or later.  Particularly perhaps TX-7, TX-10 and TX-32. 

Well, TX-7, TX-10 and TX-32 are really very different districts from each other - I don't know whether they can be compared so easily.

The ultra-rich inside the loop part of TX-7 (really River Oaks and all that area north of 59 to Shepherd Avenue, along with West U and Bellaire) has moved left during the Bush years, but what similar area hasn't.  The ultra-rich inner suburbs of Dallas in TX-32 have done the same.  In TX-7, this is certainly not because of minority infiltration, in TX-32, somewhat moreso (towards Richardson, for example) but not as much.  The other areas I mentioned above in TX-7 are traditionally Democratic (Montrose, Meyerland, couple of other really distinct little subdivisions I know too much about).  TX-32 has a couple of these white Dem areas, but less population.

The real difference between TX-7 and TX-32 is that those outside-the-loop suburbs in TX-7 are fast-growing (lot of development), newer and more classically suburban Republican (not ultra-rich, but bourgeoisie).  There's nothing like that happening in TX-32, in fact I don't think there's any population growth there whatsoever.  Interestingly, there are certain lower-income subdivision pockets (well, lower income than the newer suburbs) out there in TX-7 and that's where the Hispanic bourgeoisie is moving in.  They also have more of a redneck element.

TX-10 is really three districts - the Austin area, the rural areas along the 290 corridor and the Houston exurbs.  The rule here is simple - you need to get the hyper-GOP margins of those Houston exurbs down (71-26 McCaul in 2006) or do better in Austin than past candidates have done (Ankrum won it 55-38 in 2006).  Or maybe something can be done in the rural areas, although they probably only cast about 15%-20% of the rural vote.  Which do you think is more possible?

Also, past 2010, the real question is how redistricting is done and who controls it.  Just FYI.

[MarkWarner08]

No, but a challenger with money should make it more interesting than normal, especially in terms of advertising.  I'm guessing it can be gotten closer than 59%-38%, but how much more, I dunno. 

If I know the CD well enough, most of the swing in recent years has occurred in the inside the loop areas.  You will find it interesting to note that the NE corner of that CD is the trendy Midtown area, which has grown like gangbusters in the past few years with annoying yuppie types who, of course, tend to vote more liberal.  The Vietnamese are also stationed in that area, comprising most of the Asian contingent.  Montrose, the home of the gays, is also in this CD, as is Meyerland, to the south of Bellaire, home to Houston's Jewish population.  The small black community here is just south of Meyerland.  The Hispanics appear in different sorts of areas, some inside the loop, some populating along with whites outside the loop, especially north of I-10.

The problem is, of course, the outside-the-loop areas (in general).  They contain the typical sort of straight-ticket suburban Republican that has shown no interest in moving either in 2004 or afterwards. (see Jersey Village area, especially, also along 6).  I should point out, for my own amusement, Spring Branch, which is in this CD, just south of I-10, outside the loop.  Although more unknown than River Oaks, its population is quite frankly about as rich as River Oaks, but tends to act more like suburban Republicans, rather than country club Republicans (as does River Oaks).  Just a little oddity

The swing here in the 2006 wave was about similar to the Texas-statewide swing, which smells about right to me, given the factors labeled above.  I pause to remind you that few blacks live here and fewer college students live here, present company notwithstanding.  Your hope is to create a mammoth swing among the inside-the-loopers and I guess try to swing a few outside the loopers?  Probably a lost cause in a Prez election, as I suspect the Bush-McCain swing (as should be expected in Texas) is less than most other CDs and more importantly, the nasty convenience of straight-ticket voting.

Hope this answers a few questions.

EDIT:  Had a brain fart and confused Culberson with someone else on a point, so I'm editing this out.

Thanks for this informative background about TX-07. Your analysis goes into much more depth than my 2008 Almanac of American Politics.

Of the three most vulnerable Republican-held Texas CDs, TX-10 seems the most likely to flip, which is unfortunate for me, because I'll be living pretty far away from there.

I assume that Larry Joe Doherty, who is from Houston, would do better in the Houston exurbs that McCaul's last foe. If Doherty wins the Austin area with 65% and uses his folksy appeal to hold down McCaul's margin in the rural areas, he might pull off the upset.  I doubt that he'll close the gap -- if he does, McCaul will surely dip into his personal fortune to pay for late ad buys.

[MarkWarner08]

Democrat Michael Skelley, who enjoys a 2-1 CoH edge over Republican incumbent John Culberson, has launched this new ad.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WoCYFMjY-TI

Skelley, the founder of a Houston wind energy company, could benefit from the growing salience of energy costs as a campaign issue.

[Torie]

The GOP gerrymander of the Houston area is just such a beautiful thing, and the beauty of it, is that the precincts going one way or the other, are nicely divided from each other, so one does not need to make the lines too erose.

[agcatter]

Republicans get back Delay's old seat - Lampson is packing as we speak.

Republicans +1 in Tx in this cycle.

[Sam Spade]

The GOP gerrymander of the Houston area is just such a beautiful thing, and the beauty of it, is that the precincts going one way or the other, are nicely divided from each other, so one does not need to make the lines too erose.

Well, so long as the GOP holds on to the State House after 2010 (odds would be quite high with an Obama presidency - Senate isn't going to change, and since it looks like Kay Bailey wants to run for Gov, then, well, you know...), you'll get to see them pull all those blue/marginal areas that they couldn't incorporate into the two black and one Hispanic CDs before because of population into those CDs because those CDs are actually losing population.

Actually, that map does a good job of dividing the black areas from the Hispanic areas in Houston.  Almost absolutely clear.

Anyway, there's the thread-jack.  Frankly, I'm glad Skelly has that money to spend.  If he can get it within ten points here, the Democrats should run for him for any office, period.  Heck, if he gets above 40% (probably a more realistic goal), I would personally recommend it also.

[MarkWarner08]

Anyway, there's the thread-jack.  Frankly, I'm glad Skelly has that money to spend.  If he can get it within ten points here, the Democrats should run for him for any office, period.  Heck, if he gets above 40% (probably a more realistic goal), I would personally recommend it also.

Yes. Texas Democrats clearly suffer from a dearth of viable Anglo candidates. Among up-an-coming Latino pols, Rafael Anchia seems to the cream of the crop. Do you know anything about Anchia? All I know about him comes from a laudatory profile in Texas Monthly.

As to Skelly's chances, I wouldn't be surprised if he breaks 45%. While that may seem like a herculean challenge thanks to the deft racial redistricting that Torie pointed out, Skelly has the right profile (local business leader, supporter of cutting business taxes, proponent of drilling in ANWR), to appeal to Chamber of Commerce Republicans that dominate this district.

Furthermore, when was the last time a Texas Republican Congressman was outspent 2-1? Has that ever happened before? That edge combined with the Fred Barton-funded GOTV efforts could nudge Skelly past 45%.

[Sam Spade]

Anyway, there's the thread-jack.  Frankly, I'm glad Skelly has that money to spend.  If he can get it within ten points here, the Democrats should run for him for any office, period.  Heck, if he gets above 40% (probably a more realistic goal), I would personally recommend it also.

Yes. Texas Democrats clearly suffer from a dearth of viable Anglo candidates. Among up-an-coming Latino pols, Rafael Anchia seems to the cream of the crop. Do you know anything about Anchia? All I know about him comes from a laudatory profile in Texas Monthly.

As to Skelly's chances, I wouldn't be surprised if he breaks 45%. While that may seem like a herculean challenge thanks to the deft racial redistricting that Torie pointed out, Skelly has the right profile (local business leader, supporter of cutting business taxes, proponent of drilling in ANWR), to appeal to Chamber of Commerce Republicans that dominate this district.

Furthermore, when was the last time a Texas Republican Congressman was outspent 2-1? Has that ever happened before? That edge combined with the Fred Barton-funded GOTV efforts could nudge Skelly past 45%.

Money is not everything with Culberson.  You're not old enough to remember, though you might have read it in the Barone pub, that Culberson was massively (and I mean massively) outspent in the Republican primary when he first ran for this CD by a total of around 7 to 1 and still won due to excellent GOTV work.

I can tell you my prediction here, because it's quite easy - Culberson will run between 2 to 3 points above or 2 to 3 points behind what McCain, whatever you think that total will be.  Mark it.

[MarkWarner08]

Anyway, there's the thread-jack.  Frankly, I'm glad Skelly has that money to spend.  If he can get it within ten points here, the Democrats should run for him for any office, period.  Heck, if he gets above 40% (probably a more realistic goal), I would personally recommend it also.

Yes. Texas Democrats clearly suffer from a dearth of viable Anglo candidates. Among up-an-coming Latino pols, Rafael Anchia seems to the cream of the crop. Do you know anything about Anchia? All I know about him comes from a laudatory profile in Texas Monthly.

As to Skelly's chances, I wouldn't be surprised if he breaks 45%. While that may seem like a herculean challenge thanks to the deft racial redistricting that Torie pointed out, Skelly has the right profile (local business leader, supporter of cutting business taxes, proponent of drilling in ANWR), to appeal to Chamber of Commerce Republicans that dominate this district.

Furthermore, when was the last time a Texas Republican Congressman was outspent 2-1? Has that ever happened before? That edge combined with the Fred Barton-funded GOTV efforts could nudge Skelly past 45%.

Money is not everything with Culberson.  You're not old enough to remember, though you might have read it in the Barone pub, that Culberson was massively (and I mean massively) outspent in the Republican primary when he first ran for this CD by a total of around 7 to 1 and still won due to excellent GOTV work.

I can tell you my prediction here, because it's quite easy - Culberson will run between 2 to 3 points above or 2 to 3 points behind what McCain, whatever you think that total will be.  Mark it.

Hmm..

Bush won with 69% in 2000 and 64% in 2004. Assuming the home state bounce is 3%, McCain begins with 61%. Of course, McCain isn't likely to match Bush's '04 showing, so I'd subtract another 4-6% from Bush '04 win.  That puts the likely McCain margin at 55%-57%. If Culberson runs 2%-3% behind McCain, he'll win with between 52%-55%, which seems about right.

Barring a Culberson collapse (e.g., he champions a plan to a create a truck tax, and then use the revenue to build a nuclear waste storage facility next to the Toyota Stadium), Skelley's ceiling is probably 47%.  I think 44%-46% is the reasonable ceiling for a well-run Skelly campaign.

[Sam Spade]

Anyway, there's the thread-jack.  Frankly, I'm glad Skelly has that money to spend.  If he can get it within ten points here, the Democrats should run for him for any office, period.  Heck, if he gets above 40% (probably a more realistic goal), I would personally recommend it also.

Yes. Texas Democrats clearly suffer from a dearth of viable Anglo candidates. Among up-an-coming Latino pols, Rafael Anchia seems to the cream of the crop. Do you know anything about Anchia? All I know about him comes from a laudatory profile in Texas Monthly.

As to Skelly's chances, I wouldn't be surprised if he breaks 45%. While that may seem like a herculean challenge thanks to the deft racial redistricting that Torie pointed out, Skelly has the right profile (local business leader, supporter of cutting business taxes, proponent of drilling in ANWR), to appeal to Chamber of Commerce Republicans that dominate this district.

Furthermore, when was the last time a Texas Republican Congressman was outspent 2-1? Has that ever happened before? That edge combined with the Fred Barton-funded GOTV efforts could nudge Skelly past 45%.

Money is not everything with Culberson.  You're not old enough to remember, though you might have read it in the Barone pub, that Culberson was massively (and I mean massively) outspent in the Republican primary when he first ran for this CD by a total of around 7 to 1 and still won due to excellent GOTV work.

I can tell you my prediction here, because it's quite easy - Culberson will run between 2 to 3 points above or 2 to 3 points behind what McCain, whatever you think that total will be.  Mark it.

Hmm..

Bush won with 69% in 2000 and 64% in 2004. Assuming the home state bounce is 3%, McCain begins with 61%. Of course, McCain isn't likely to match Bush's '04 showing, so I'd subtract another 4-6% from Bush '04 win.  That puts the likely McCain margin at 55%-57%. If Culberson runs 2%-3% behind McCain, he'll win with between 52%-55%, which seems about right.

Barring a Culberson collapse (e.g., he champions a plan to a create a truck tax, and then use the revenue to build a nuclear waste storage facility next to the Toyota Stadium), Skelley's ceiling is probably 47%.  I think 44%-46% is the reasonable ceiling for a well-run Skelly campaign.

I doubt Bush had any home state advantage to speak of in this CD in 2004, so you need to take that into account - 3% is being quite generous.  The wave in 2006 was pretty uniform around Texas at 5%, just FYI.

There is some natural decay here, however.  That should put McCain at somewhere around 60%, give or take a point or two, should the national election be even (I suspect McCain runs around 57-42 in Texas if the national election is even).  However, McCain may do better among the upper-income seculars than Bush did nationally, so keep this in mind.

Anyway, we're really arguing a few points here, a few points there.  Big deal.  Sounds like your typical Texas election.

[jimrtex]

Eh, I doubt it, but one can certainly hope.

Interestingly, TX-7 was Daddy Bush's old Congressional seat.

40 years ago, this area (along with the German Hill Country and the rich Dallas suburbs - both smaller in population) was the only Republican part of Texas, literally. 

Of course, the area in TX-07 that is outside the loop was still mainly rural at that time.

After the Democrats were forced to comply with one man, one vote, 3 Republicans were elected to Congress from Texas, one from Harris, one from Dallas, and one from Bexar counties.  The one from Harris County was George (HW) Bush.

During the redistricting hearings in 2001, former Rep. Martin Frost's hireling Gerald Hebert sold a lie that the the Texas legislature had valued incumbency so much that they hadn't redistricted and made Joe Pool run statewide.  In fact, Joe Pool had run from a district in 1958 and 1960, and had more votes than Sam Rayburn and Wright Patman combined.    Unfortunately for Pool, the district consisted of all of Dallas County and he was the only Democrat in Texas to lose.  The 951,000 people of the district was the largest of any in the country pre-Wesberry (when the average district was around 410 thousand) and 4.39 times that of the smallest district in Texas.  It is obvious that after the 1960 Census, the Democrat-run Texas Legislature did not want to create any more Republican districts in urban areas - and so forced the election of the two new representatives statewide.  Two-time loser Pool then ran statewide.   The GOP lost the Dallas District in the 1984 LBJ landside, but gained the 3 new districts created as part of redistricting after the Wesberry decision.