The first part of an election cycle is always devoted to the retirement watch - and some congressmen rumored to be eying an exit are closely monitored for any statement or fundraising report that might hint at their intentions.
Politicians often end up contradicting themselves, pledging to run for another term before abruptly pulling the plug months later. (Think of New Mexico’s Pete Domenici in 2007.) This is not certainly not surprising: As long as a congressman has not decided for sure to retire, he cannot admit to be even thinking about it or it will be impossible for him to prepare a re-election campaign, hire staff and find donors.
This is something to keep in mind as potential retirees start informing us that they will be candidates in 2010.
—
Today, Kentucky’s Republican Senator Jim Bunning said that he would run for re-election and that he would soon focus on raising money, adding that he intended to be “a solid conservative voice in the U.S. Senate.”
Bunning’s failure to raise much money for now (he has less than $200,000 of cash on hand), combined with his age (he will be 79 by the next Election Day) had sparked speculation that he would retire - speculation that Bunning has repeatedly tried to quiet down.
Bunning might actually be one of those rare incumbents whose retirement might help his party. A former baseball star, Bunning has never fully grown into his politician costume and he has won his first two terms in extremely tough races. He only won his first election by 0.5% in 1998 and prevailed by 1.4% in 2004, in a race that no one was paying attention to before the closing weeks of the campaign. But Bunning’s numbers collapsed in the closing stretch due to a number of bizarre incidents and senior moments.
There is no reason for Bunning not to repeat such faux pas this year, and his lack of stature makes him an appealing target - even a state that has been trending Republican. A number of Democrats are likely to jump in the race whether or not Bunning runs for re-election (in fact, some declined to run against McConnell in 2008 hoping to have a clearer shot at Bunning).
In short: We will have to wait a few more months to know whether Bunning is actually running for re-election, but this potential retirement would be unlikely to be a huge boost to Democrats anyway.
—
Meanwhile, in Kansas’s third district, Democratic Rep. Dennis Moore said yesterday that he would run for re-election in 2010. This comes only a week after Moore had indicated he was thinking about retiring, so it is certainly a significant story - and perhaps too quick a turnaround to trust entirely.
If confirmed in the months ahead, Moore’s decision would be a huge relief for Democrats. This is a very Republican district - one Bush won twice by double-digits - and Moore has been a longtime target of the GOP. An open seat in KS-03 would undoubtedly be one of the most promising news of the past two cycles for Republicans - and it would be an extremely tough hold for Democrats, particularly in a midterm with a Democratic President.
Moore’s decision also has repercussions for the state’s open Senate seat. Democrats face a very tough road to making that race competitive, and only a few candidates - among them Moore and Governor Sebelius, who has become available for the contest now that she withdrew her name from consideration in the Obama Cabinet. Moore’s decision to stick to the House puts additional pressure on Sebelius - and this is something we (and the DSCC) will surely talk about a lot over the next year.
I’ve never cared for Bunning’s abrasive approach during various Senate hearings. I always felt that Greenspan made Bunning look like a fool when Bunning started hammering him on various issues.
Bunning was also one of the guys voting against the appointment of Robert Gates as Secretary of Defense. I wouldn’t be surprised if this comes back to haunt him.
If Ben Chandler runs against Bunning, then Bunning will likely lose easily, only doing a bit better than how Rick Santorum did in 2006 against Casey Jr. in PA. However, if Chandler doesn’t run (and I believe that the common wisdom is that Chandler is inclinded NOT to run) then Bunning would still be in a toss-up because he is such a weak incumbnet. A retirement would only help Republican’s marginally, as while the state is trending away from the Democrats at the Presidential level, the Democrats are much stronger at the congressional level and down, and if McConnell could win against a perosn with no political expericnce only in the single digits, then a open seat that will almost attract a much stronger Democrat will be hard.
Taniel, it is true that Bush won Moore’s seat by double digits, but I have looked at Kansas blogs and some of the bloggers give out specfic numbers saying that Obama may have actually won the KS 3rd district by a narrow margin, so KS 3rd may not be as tough for Democrats to hold as you may think, althrough him running for reelection means that the seat will likely be safe in 2010. I do think that since Sebelius refused to be in Obama’s cabinent and that she is term limited in 2010 from running again, she will be under extreme pressure to run in the open Senate seat, and I think it is slightly more than 50-50 that she runs, as she somes somewhat ambitious and not right ready to go into the background after she is finished with her term. As a statewide winner, she might even be a slight favorite against either of the two Kansas U.S. House members who have already announced a bid, but if she doesnt’ run then the Democrats will have almost no chance.