Summary: Harry Reid has had a rough time in the polls lately - but there are several reasons he can he still pull off a fifth term.
The National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) has made Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) a top target for the 2010 midterm elections.
Back in May, we posted this goofy ad the NRSC released attacking Reid for a fundraiser in Las Vegas:
We’ve seen this movie before. In 2004, the NRSC spent millions of dollars to defeat then-Democratic Senate Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota. The Democrats have a habit of selecting senators from moderate states to lead in the chamber. It can come back to bite them because they have to balance their constituents’ beliefs with the goals of the larger Democratic Party.
With a high disapproval rating (at 54%) of Reid among Nevadans, he seems like the logical next target for the GOP. So far, two Republicans appear to be challenging him, and both are leading him in the polls.
But are there signs of life for the Majority Leader’s campaign?
Most will agree that Reid is vulnerable going into next year, but few will say it’s a done deal. Reid has more than a few things going for him in this upcoming election.
First, just take a look at Nevada. While it is largely a moderate state, the aggregate Cook PVI is still D+7, and registered Democrats outnumber registered Republicans about 44% to 36%. On top of that, Reid’s approval rating has been as high as 45% over the past month - it could be worse.
Then there’s the incumbency effect. The Reid campaign is already working on an outreach strategy that will “reintroduce” voters to their Democratic senator, touting his work on their behalf, including his move to block nuclear waste from being stored at Yucca Mountain.
Campaigning will be tough, but the successes Democrats have had in Nevada over the past four years will make things easier. Simply put, the Democrats have located important activists and donors who will come in handy come election time. In 2008 the Democrats had over 100,000 more volunteers than the GOP for GOTV efforts in the Silver State.
And let’s not forget the war chest. So far Reid has raised $11 million for next year, as just part of his $25 million goal. The shear amount of spending on this race is likely to be unprecedented in Nevadan politics, and Reid is certain to have the advantage.
Columnist Howard Steiner is currently writing a series of articles in which he pretends he is a Reid candidate, developing a message that would prop up a theoretical challenger to victory.
From his column:
The Republican challengers for Harry Reid's senate seat hopefully understand that they cannot count on Reid's lack of popularity in the polls to carry the election. Democrats no doubt will get out the vote and the Republican Party is still in a shambles.
And that’s exactly our point: Reid will not necessarily be a Daschle, and the GOP can’t expect him to lose without a fight.
When it was first revealed that Senator John Ensign (R-NV) had had an affair with a former campaign staffer, many in the political realm thought his legislative career might survive the scandal. Politico even suggested that with a quick apology and ending the conversation about the affair - much like Senator David Vitter (R-LA) did - he could continue in the Senate without needing much further damage control.
But over the past month, more and more revelations about the affair have come to light - and it all looks worse and worse for Ensign.
To really understand just how tangled and twisted the entire ordeal was - or, perhaps, is - one needs to see the entire history of the scandal. Luckily for us, the Las Vegas Sun has done a very good job chronicling the story.
The Affair Itself
Ensign began his extramarital affair with Cindy Hampton - the treasurer for his campaign committee and Battle Born PAC, as well as his wife’s good friend - in December 2007 after months of “having feelings” for her. She was receiving about $1,900 a month for those two positions until her salary doubled as the affair began.
Meanwhile, Hampton’s husband Doug was working as an administrative assistant to the Senator on the government side (where he was - for those interested - making over $13,000 a month).
But it was sort of an on-again off-again affair. Apparently it stopped in February when Ensign admitted to Doug that he made a mistake and “vowed to change” - but Doug needed to move on.
February - April 2008
Ensign asked his political consultant - Mike Slanker - to hire Doug at his firm, November Inc. Slanker - who apparently had no knowledge of the affair yet - agreed without much thought.
But a few weeks later, Ensign’s wife, Darlene, called Slanker to let him in on everything. Slanker confronted Ensign about it at his office at the NRSC (Note: while Ensign was the Chair of the NRSC, Slanker’s wife, Lindsay, was its Finance Director). He took Doug Hampton off Ensign’s hands, knowing the two couldn’t really work together anymore.
But here’s the real kicker - the reason Ensign was so desperate to get Doug a new job was so he could go back to pursuing Cindy. The affair continued.
Severance, Gift, or Bribe?
Cindy - like her husband - also left Ensign’s employ at the end of April that year. As a severance from the campaign and PAC committees she received $25,000.
As if that wasn’t a significant amount of cash, Ensign’s parents gave Cindy another $96,000 as a “gift”. Actually, it was technically several gifts, as they wrote a series of checks to make sure they wouldn’t have to pay a gifts tax.
When the story was uncovered this year - over a year since the Hamptons stopped working for the Nevada Senator - ethics groups including Citizens for Responsibility filed complaints arguing that the gift was indeed an undocumented severance pay to the Hamptons.
But what is truly interesting is the fact that this looks so much like a pay-off. When the affair was revealed, Doug Hampton said that he was entitled to “millions” for what the Senator had done to him. Although it cannot be proved (and there’s actually evidence to the contrary) Ensign claimed Doug was blackmailing him.
Besides, who would be more inclined to bribe his way out of a sex scandal than an important Republican Senator with presidential ambitions? Even if the gift was not explicitly a bribe, it sure had the feel of one.
It All Comes Out
Sometime after the affair finally ended (around August 2008) and after Doug left November Inc. (a fascinating email exchange shows that Doug was concerned about his role there while Ensign was a client) Doug Hampton decided to bring it all out.
His course of action was a little peculiar. He sent an email to former Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA) - of all people - with an attached document that spelled out the nature of the scandal. He said in the email that he had met Santorum a few times, and while the former Pennsylvania Senator might not remember him, he had a great respect for his integrity.
More importantly, Santorum had become a contributor for Fox News.
Now, what Santorum was supposed to do with that information is a little confusing. This is what Hampton writes at the end of the message:
“It is my strong request we speak prior to you calling John but I realize I cannot control what you choose to do with the information…Your wisdom, counsel and insight would be greatly appreciated…as well as your help to resolve this terrible cover up.”
And no one knows exactly what happened after that, but in the end it was Ensign who called a news conference and was the first to explain the affair to the press and public.
In the end, he lost several aids (including his Chief-of-Staff) and any chance of becoming President.
Weird Religious Twists
Perhaps the most bizarre aspect of the story is the involvement of a group known as “The Family” - a Christian fundamentalist organization and powerful lobby group that houses influential people - including dozens of members of Congress - at its headquarters on C Street.
Writer Jeff Sharlet - who recently published a book on The Family - explains the organization as such:
“The Family began with this idea that God does not work through churches but rather through those whom The Family calls the “New Chosen.” They believe they’re chosen by God. They can’t be expected to pray with the rest of us. They need to pray in private with people of equal status.
When you join one of these prayer groups, you give these men veto power over your life, over every aspect of your life. Wives involved with The Family have said, “In my husband’s life, his brothers come first, I come second.”
Ensign was living there in February last year during his affair. Apparently Doug went to the group to explain what was happening and they told Ensign to end it.
One member of Congress living with The Family that purportedly told Ensign to end the affair was Sen. Tom Colburn (R-OK). Colburn had denied knowing about the affair and - once this part of the story broke - refused to speak about his discussion because he was counseling Ensign “as a physician [he’s an OB-GYN] and as an ordained deacon.”
More simply put, The Family observes a “code of silence” as part of its intense secrecy (a secrecy that seems to rival that of the Freemasons).
The only public activity The Family engages in is The Fellowship’s (their broader organization’s) National Prayer Breakfasts.
In fact, Hampton cites the National Prayer Breakfasts in his email to Santorum, reminding the former Senator that they sat together at one when Santorum was a speaker for the event.
And the emails themselves are filled with religion. In Slanker’s email to Hampton, he tells his new employee that “God has put [me and Lindsay] in this place to help and love”.
Hampton’s reply expands on religion even more:
“To give you an update, the Lord has recently introduced [me and Cindy] to a new counselor…With a lot of hard work on our parts, the counselors help and guidance from the Lord I believe we are headed in the right direction.
…I want you to know that my intent was to reveal or discuss what God is teaching me about the leader he is calling me to be knowing the terrible husband and person I have been…”
Ensign’s Future
Since the news of the affair broke, Ensign’s approval rating has dropped 22% and his disapproval rating has risen 20%.
While voters seemed divided in the mid-July survey over whether or not he should run for re-election, the Nevada electorate does seem to take some of the more revealing details of the scandal “very seriously” - and of these details, the newer fact that he fired his staffer in order to pursue the man’s wife is not among them. Nor is there any mention of Ensign's involvement in the strange, egotistical, fundementalist secret society.
As of now he plans to run for re-election. But that election won’t be until November of 2012. The question we’ll have to wait and see for an answer is “will they remember?”
Politico has a good article today on the NRSC’s latest candidate recruitment. The committee - which is run by conservative Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) - has been recruiting moderate Republicans to run for Senate in 2010.
The party’s top choice for Florida’s open Senate seat is popular Gov. Charlie Crist, who raised eyebrows earlier this year with his vigorous advocacy of President Barack Obama’s stimulus package — he even went so far as to appear with Obama at a Florida rally in February. In Connecticut, the national GOP has lobbied former Rep. Rob Simmons — who holds a higher lifetime rating from the liberal Americans for Democratic Action group than Specter does — to challenge Democratic Sen. Chris Dodd.
In Delaware, where there is widespread consensus that just one Republican — Rep. Michael Castle, the co-founder of the moderate Republican Main Street Partnership — can win Joe Biden’s former seat, the push is on to get him to announce for the Senate.
In the Midwest, there’s Illinois Rep. Mark Kirk, another leading centrist viewed as the GOP’s best hope of capturing a blue-state Senate seat — the one Obama vacated after he was elected president.
On the West Coast, National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman John Cornyn of Texas is hoping to land self-proclaimed moderate businesswoman Carly Fiorina to run against Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) in a state that gave Obama 61 percent of the vote.
It is a quiet and pragmatic move on the part of the GOP. They are looking for candidates that represent the state’s local values over party ideologues and they’re specifically targeting states in which the Democratic senators have "screwed up".
Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) - the Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee which oversaw the bailout - is a good example of a Senator who fell from popularity in his home state. Senator Roland Burris (D-IL), on the other hand, was never popular to begin with due to his ties to former Governor Rod Blagojevich (D-IL).
But the party is moving further to the right and many right-wing activists have already been trying to purge moderate members that are currently in office. Similarly, they are trying to ensure their party doesn’t move any further left with the new challengers.
"Sen. Cornyn has done a great job with recruitment," said Carl Forti, a Republican consultant who headed the National Republican Congressional Committee’s independent expenditure effort in 2006. "The ironic thing in the House and Senate is you need moderate candidates to win if you want to be successful. That’s why you currently see Pennsylvania Republicans looking for a moderate to take on Toomey, because of the belief that while Toomey is fine in a primary, he can’t win the general election because he’s too conservative. This will be an ongoing problem for the party"…
…Still, despite the focus on a moderate-rich recruiting class, it’s not a foregone conclusion that all of them will be on the ballot in November 2010. In Connecticut, Florida and Pennsylvania, viable conservative candidates are already running against the national party’s darlings.
In Connecticut, state Sen. Sam Caligiuri is running against Simmons and is expected to attack his moderate voting record in Congress. If Crist runs, he’ll have to defend his support of the stimulus against a more conservative opponent, former Florida House Speaker Marco Rubio. And any Republican who jumps into the Pennsylvania race will have to get past Toomey, whom conservatives laud for forcing Specter out of the party.
"It’s ironic but not surprising that the Senate Republicans would see a path that would be blazed by moderates," said Republican pollster Adam Geller. "There’s a chunk of GOP voters that won’t make the political calculation and rather would stand with their principles, even if it means they lose."
One could see the recruitment of these "RINOs" (or Republicans-In-Name-Only) as an experiment. If some can get past the primary it will demonstrate where the GOP base is most ideological and where it is more pragmatic. If some of these moderate Republicans can win their General Elections, this may prove to be an important strategy that could dramatically shift GOP campaign operations in the years to come.
But for 2010, the best that Republicans like Cornyn can hope for is gaining more insight as to how to retake power.
It has been quite a while since we gave you a detailed update of the Coleman-Franken “race” in Minnesota, so we thought we would do so today.
A 3-judge panel ruled unanimously last week that Democrat Al Franken won the election for U.S. Senate back in November by 312 votes. Norm Coleman argued that Minnesota’s variety of procedures to count absentee ballots violated the Equal Protection clause of the U.S. Constitution and disenfranchised over 4,000 voters. Politico reports on how the panel responded.
While acknowledging that errors were bound to happen in any election, the court said that the Minnesota Senate election was free from fraud and that errors did not reach a constitutional violation of equal protection.
"There is no evidence of a systematic problem of disenfranchisement in the state’s election system, including in its absentee-balloting procedures," the judges wrote. "To the contrary, the general election resulted in a ‘fair expression’ of the voters of Minnesota."
Attorney Ben Ginsberg - a legend of the Bush v. Gore battle, and is representing Coleman - said the judges spent "so much time in patting their back on the Minnesota system" that they "missed the issue" that thousands of voters are still being disenfranchised. "We’ll be at peace if all Minnesotans are enfranchised."
Staying on message, NRSC Chairman Sen. John Cornyn told supporters in a fundraising email that the Court’s decision was "fundamentally misguided" and that Democrats were being hypocritical. "It’s frankly shocking that many of the same Democrats who so loudly decried voter disenfranchisement during the Florida recount in 2000 have so quickly run away from that principle when it no longer fits their political agenda" said Cornyn’s email.
But the Democrats are hitting back with a radio ad. The ad tells Coleman to "stop putting his political ambition ahead of what’s right for Minnesota."
"Enough is enough," says the announcer, noting that Franken won the original election, the recount and a legal challenge. "America is in an economic crisis - and Minnesota faces unique challenges of its own. Minnesota deserves two Senators and voters deserve to have their verdict stand without delay."
Coming one day after a three-judge panel in Minnesota ruled that Franken "received the highest number of votes legally cast," the ad also represents a coordinated Democratic push to end the race.
The DNC-funded ad is playing on news radio stations in the Twin Cities.
Coleman, however, has already appealed the recent decision to the Minnesota Supreme Court, which has agreed to review the case. However, there is some question as to whether a quorum of Justices can be reached.
Two of the seven Minnesota Justices have already recused themselves because they served on the State Canvassing Board that has ruled on a great number of issues in this case. Now the legal community is wondering whether there will be three more recusals.
Justices Lori Gildea and Christopher Dietzen donated to Coleman campaigns, while Helen Meyer gave money to Sen. Paul Wellstone, whom Coleman challenged in 2002. These are certainly grounds for recusal.
But in order for a quorum of the Court to be reached - and to therefore decide the case - at least four of the seven Justices must be present. It is pretty unusual for a case to be undecided by the Court due to recusals.
If it does happen, the issue would be dead and Al Franken would finally take his seat in the U.S. Senate. If the Justices do not recuse themselves…well, we don’t know where we’ll be a month from now.
