Tag Archives: CA-49

Owning California’s Congressional Challenges

Cross-posted here, here, and here.

BENAWU posted another of his great Congressional race tracker updates yesterday, announcing that 317 out of 435 House races have confirmed candidates (or presumed returning incumbents).  But despite this early success, in California there are only confirmed challengers for 10 out of 19 sitting Republicans.  Only Texas has more unfilled races right now, and it’s friggin Texas.  As BENAWU notes, all of these districts had challengers in 2006, so some level of infrastructure exists for a challenge.  Now many of these districts are going to be tough sledding for any Democrat thanks to redistricting in 2002, but anyone who’s been paying attention the last few years knows that the Republican party is potentially vulnerable almost anywhere.  The goal of filling every race proved its worth last year with surprising success in supposedly safe districts across the country.  Just ask Jerry McNerney or Nancy Boyda or Jim Webb for starters.

The advantages of competing everywhere have been well established and I won’t get long-winded about them here.  Being well positioned for an unexpected scandal, building the party by presenting an honest version of the platform, keeping incumbents (and their money) tied to the home district, supporting up and down ticket races, the reasons stretch on and on.  Certainly in California there’s a lot of reason to be concerned with keeping incumbents at home.  Seven of the incumbents have a combined net cash on hand of $2,511,924 already, the 8th (Darrell Issa is worth as much as $677 million) is one of the richest members of Congress, and the 9th will be, well…Duncan Hunter’s son.  So keeping their focus narrow is going to be key to efforts throughout the state and country.  The Race Tracker is a great resource, but it requires that the rest of us do the legwork.  So to make sure that California covers every district this year, I’m asking for volunteers to take one of the nine remaining districts and chase it down, investigate, babysit, prod, browbeat, and just generally keep track of efforts to get a candidate.  I don’t want us to wake up a year from now and realize that we forgot a district, and in the process I think it’s an excellent opportunity to get to know the state a bit better.  These districts stretch from Oregon to Mexico and encompass urban, suburban, rural areas.  You don’t have to live in the district to adopt it, but being nearby or knowing someone might help.  Some of these might be really easy- there might be a candidate next week.  Others might be heavy on the labor and light on the love.  Quite frankly, I don’t know; but I should.  So here’s a rundown of the districts who need some attention, and to get the ball rolling, I’m willing to take either CA-49 or CA-52, depending on what people’s interest level might be in one or the other.  Any takers for the remaining districts?

CA-02: Rep. Wally Herger has held this seat stretching from Yuba City to Oregon since 1988.  Republicans have a 45/33 registration advantage and Bush received 62% in 2004.  But Herger didn’t much outperform Bush and Bush isn’t nearly as popular anywhere as he was in 2004.  It’s not Dem country, but Herger is especially bad.

CA-03: Rep. Dan Lungren was elected to this seat which wraps around Sacramento and runs to Nevada in 2004 but has been in Congress before.  When serving Southern California in the 1980s, he was one of Newt Gingrich’s favorite minions.  He’s since done two terms as California’s Attorney General and lost the governor’s race in 1998.  This seat, in various incarnations, spent 36 years in Democratic hands before going Republican in 1998’s election and while it’s been redrawn to be more favorable to Republicans, neither Bush nor Lungren was able to crack 60% in their last respective elections in this R+7 district.

CA-19: Rep. George Radanovich holds down this Central California district including Oakdale and Kerman.  Challenger T.J. Cox raised almost $700,000 last year, and Radanovich is currently sitting on only $123,000.  This has been declared an impossible district for Democrats (it’s one of the most Republican in the state), but Radanovich had to stay home more than usual last year, and that’s better for all of us.

CA-21: Rep. Devin Nunes was elected to Congress in 2002 before he turned 30 years old and is the only representative this new district to the West and South of Fresno has ever had.  He was barely phased by last year’s wave election, getting his lowest percentage ever, but still claiming 67%.  But that’s still the right direction, and the work of reclamation begins by showing up.

CA-22: Rep. Kevin McCarthy has the honor of representing the reddest California district since last year. It covers the inland portions of San Luis Obispo and the suburbs around Bakersfield, reaching all the way to the 395.  Sharon Beery ran here last year but found no fundraising traction.  This one may be the biggest windmill the state has to tilt at, but McCarthy cruised past $1 million in fundraising to take the open seat and is already closing in on a half million on hand.  We don’t want that money propping up Republicans elsewhere if at all possible.

CA-25: Rep. Buck McKeon grabbed this crazy-huge district in 1992 (Santa Clarita to Barstow to the Nevada border and stretching almost all the way to Lake Tahoe.  John Kerry didn’t fare too well here, but Barbara Boxer got more than 45% back in 2004. With Republicans even less popular and McKeon remaining just as conservative (PP score of 3.77%), there’s room for a Democrat to find a sympathetic ear or two.  McKeon had no problem fundraising himself out of any trouble last year, let’s make sure he’s forced to keep it up.

CA-45: Rep. Mary Bono is vulnerable.  Her Palm Springs and Moreno Valley district is just barely Republican and she’s managed to stay in her seat by creating a veneer of moderation to disguise her Bush-enabling record.  Barbara Boxer snagged just under 50% of the vote here in 2004 and Bush didn’t find a receptive audience last year.  2006 challenger David Roth found the monetary support but didn’t strike the right chord to take advantage of voters open to Democratic persuasion.  Time to find someone to strike that chord.

CA-49: Rep. Darrell Issa is a tough nut to crack after buying this Camp Pendleton, Oceanside and Temecula district in 2000.  He’s absurdly rich and got that way through a number of alleged shady dealings.  You may not know it, but you know him as the voice of Viper car alarm’s “Step back, you’re too close to the vehicle.” You may also know him as a major force behind the recall of California Gov. Gray Davis or as instrumental in the firing of US Attorney Carol Lam (who took down Duke Cunningham among others).  That’s been in the news recently hasn’t it?  But in addition to the buckets of money, it’s a solidly Republican district that’s consistently refused to embrace Democrats from Kerry to Boxer to Issa challengers.  At the very least though, it’s vitally important that we get someone in front of microphone in the district to point out loudly that the rule of law is NOT up for partisan discussion.

CA-52: Rep. Duncan Hunter is retiring from this East County San Diego seat that he’s held since 1980(!) whether he gets the presidential nomination or not.  His son (also Duncan Hunter) is the presumptive Republican on the ballot, and as an Iraq veteran will be tough to beat.  But there are glimmers of hope for Democratic ideas starting to percolate up from the local level, and Blackwater West is nearby (though out of district) and has a big fan in the elder Hunter.  Not a bad way to start a debate.

Funding California Challengers and Looking Forward

Last week I ran down the unused money from last year’s unopposed and underopposed California members of Congress.  It was a long list. 22 districts held by Democrats fielded no Republican challenger who met a very low bar of fundraising legitimacy.  Really not impressive, but really not surprising either.  So what about the flipside?  How did Democrats do in going after Republicans?

Democrats left only one California seat unopposed, and failed to raise money in one other.  Of the 21 Republican-held seats, only 4 qualified as as unopposed or underopposed (challenger raising less than $25,000).  It suggests two things to me.  One, Democrats are already doing a pretty good job of funding candidates in red districts (although there’s still room to improve of course), and two, that strong funding only goes so far given the way these districts are drawn.  So as I would be cautioning anyways, fundraising is only one piece of the puzzle.  It still takes the right candidate in the right context.

Warning: I get long-winded on the flip

Republicans held 21 districts going into the 2006 elections, and faced the following challenges by the dollars:

CA-02 Sekhon $193,582
CA-03 Durston $308,664
CA-04 Brown $1,711,967
CA-11 McNerney $2,461,329 (pickup)
CA-19 Cox $688,175
CA-21 Haze $152,530
CA-22 Beery $27,206
CA-24 Martinez $134,371
CA-25 Rodriguez $207,844
CA-26 Matthews $54,484
CA-40 Hoffman $143,706
CA-41 Contreras $0
CA-42 Unopposed
CA-43 Folkens $17,104
CA-44 Vandeberg $8,668
CA-45 Roth $725,020
CA-46 Brandt $77,764
CA-48 Young $435,083
CA-49 Criscenzo $90,050
CA-50 Busby $3,634,467
CA-52 Rinaldi $80,480

The infrastructure clearly exists to support a full slate of well-funded Democrats in California.  Indeed, on top of the above numbers was the more than $6 million that un- and under- challenged CA Dems had left over after last year.  That’s a lot of Democratic money just at the congressional level ready to roll.  I bring this up primarily in the context of discussions that have taken place here at Calitics as well as in other corners of the Internet regarding the distribution of funds and the virtues of various plans to standardize said funds.

So at the risk of starting an actual conversation here, I’d like to throw open the floor to suggestions as to how best to harness this monetary strength.  I think it’s great that there’s so much money out there and that it’s already being used to mount legitimate campaigns in tough Republican districts.  The capacity and the willingness to fight it out against long odds is already in place and that’s encouraging.  So what’s the next step?  How do we work to fill every district with a strong candidate who will use that money effectively?

Despite my track record of hearing crickets when I ask for feedback and suggestions, I think this is an open question that deserves a discussion (perhaps one that lasts all…weekend…).  California is a huge state and the manpower to investigate every race doesn’t exist here.  Even if it did, the subjectivity would turn some people off.  So I think that instead it may be that, as a community (not just a community of Front Pagers), we should be identifying and seeking out relationships with pre-existing grassroots organizations in these districts where we, quite frankly, don’t know much.

As has been discussed in several different forums, blogs serve several purposes.  Not least among these purposes is being a megaphone for the issues of existing grassroots organizations.  I know that members of Calitics have made and continue to make strides in reaching out to communities that may otherwise not be heard from online, and I’m encouraged by some of the progress that’s been made in this regard.  My question to the readers in general though is how best to bring the insights of these groups into the collective wisdom of the site.

Put shortly for anyone who skimmed to the bottom: What candidates do we want, how do we find them, and how do we get the right money to them once it happens?  This isn’t a new discussion, but it isn’t one that’s over either.