While the number of retiring House Democrats has increased in recent months, the GOP has managed to get rid of one of its only open seat headaches: A day after he dropped out of Pennsylvania’s gubernatorial race, Rep. Jim Gerlach clarified his plan by announcing he would run for re-election.
As a district that voted for John Kerry by 4% and for Barack Obama by 17%, Gerlach’s PA-06 was one of Democrats’ top opportunities - part of a firewall of potentially easy pick-ups that the DCCC was hoping would help them offset big losses elsewhere. But Gerlach’s move only leaves two obviously competitive GOP-held open seats (DE-AL and IL-10), a stark contrast to Democrats’ 8 vulnerable open seats.
What must be particularly frustrating to the DCCC is Republicans’ good luck. Indeed, while even Dodd, Dorgan and Ritter’s retirements told us something about how much the political environment has shifted over the past year, Gerlach’s reversal has nothing to do with the GOP’s upbeat outlook on 2010 or with Democrats’ declining fortunes; rather, he changed course because he was failing at gaining any traction in the Governor’s race: Facing Attorney General Tom Corbett, Gerlach was trailing in polls, he was unable to fundraising as much as he’d need to fund his campaign and he didn’t even look to have an electability edge. And yet, the NRCC managed to turn his dire situation into yet another positive development for their 2010 chances, which speaks to just how many things have gone perfectly for Republicans’ over the past 8 months.
Thankfully for Democrats, Gerlach’s unretirement does not solve the GOP’s problems. For one, Democrats have targeted this district from the moment the cycle started, and they have two candidates who’ll probably stay in the race. Newspaper publisher Doug Pike and veteran Manan Trvedi might not seem like the most formidable candidates Democrats could have found, but the DCCC seemed satisfied with them. Both have raised substantial sums of money, which should prove useful considering Gerlach has to start from scratch as I doubt he can transfer money from his gubernatorial campaign to his House committee.
And he’d sure need it, because Gerlach is known to be a weak incumbent. He narrowly survived top-tier opposition in 2004 and in 2006; in 2008, Democrats fielded a low-profile candidate with little money and little buzz, but even then Gerlach prevailed by an unexpectedly small margin. Sure, 2010 is no 2008, by which I mean that it should be hard for Democrats to beat any Republican incumbents, but PA-06 leans blue enough that Gerlach’s general election campaign is sure to be highly competitive.
If he even makes it that far: Gerlach announced his retirement mid-July, which means that for the past six months local Republicans have been preparing his succession. The congressman cannot just waltz back in the House race and expect candidates who’ve put in half-a-year’s worth of efforts to simply step aside. They might do so over time, but it will surely take a lot of persuasion from the Republican establishment, which has fully rallied behind Gerlach. For now, state Rep. Curt Schroder and businessman Steve Welch both say they will not get out of the race.
(Welch’s story is particularly amusing: He was first running in the open seat in PA-07, but Republicans officials wanted to push him out once former U.S. Attorney Pat Meehan’s entered that race. They convinced him he should move to run in PA-06, where Schroder would be a less formidable primary opponent… but Welch now finds that the race he’s in is no longer an open seat, and he once again finds himself the target of NRCC pressure. Also: Welch had recently loaned his campaign $500,000.)
If Schroder and/or Welch stand firm, it could mean that Gerlach faces the very real threat of losing the Republican primary. The contest is in four months, which gives him plenty of time to prepare but also means his opponents’ head-start could be a factor. Furthermore, it will be interesting to see whether conservative groups intervene to prevent Gerlach’s renomination, since the congressman has somewhat of a moderate profile. Whatever their reputation prior to their run, both Schroder and Welch have been campaigning as conservatives, witness this ode to Doug Hoffman on Schroder’s Facebook page. And the state representative’s latest Facebook message reads:
People want bold new direction and leadership. We need a congressman who will actually FIGHT to reverse the slide into a European style social welfare state. The 6th District deserves a Congressman who actually wants to do the job, not one who sees it as a consolation prize for a failed attempt at becoming Governor.
All of this is only to say that PA-06 remains competitive, not that Gerlach’s move doesn’t improve Republican chances. The GOP would obviously much prefer having the chance to defend an incumbent rather than an open seat in a 17% Obama district. The NRCC cannot be certain that Gerlach’s unretirement will ensure his re-nomination, let alone his re-election, but his re-entry does move a toss-up that was tilting towards Democrats back on the Republican side.
You would think a sitting congressman’s withdrawal would have some impact on the Governor’s race as well, but it is hard to see how the gubernatorial outlook might have changed. As I pointed out above, Gerlach was the heavy underdog, and polls did not suggest he would perform better than Corbett in the general election; his move can’t even be said to help the Attorney General by allowing him to save money for the general election: Not only had Gerlach been raising too little to force Corbett to empty his bank account, but Pennsylvania’s primary is early enough that it leaves plenty of time for campaigns to prepare for November.
In my opinion, Gerlach unretiring changes this race from lean Democratic to a toss-up, not a lean Democratic to lean Republican. The main reason for this is the fact taht Gerlach will likely have an contested primary and may very well lose the nomination. Especially if Schroder stays in there could be an very damaging ideological primary. Pressure will be heavy for Schroder and Welch to drop out of the race. Welch is more likely becasue of his lower profile, but Schroder is state rep. and if he trys to go like Hoffman he could very well win the primary or at least weaken Gerlach enough if the icumbent wins that he doesn’t have an advantage in Novemeber, despite the Dem primary also being contested. If Schroder drops out sometime soon, then that would greaty help GOP chances, and indeed PA-06 would become Lean Republican but that doesn’t seem likely to happen.
I don’t know how you can say for sure that Gerlach wouldn’t have performed better than Corbett in a general election. No polls were even taken of Gerlach vs the Dems in a general election. Plus, you say that his 2008 house challenger was underfunded, but all together Democrats spent more money trying to defeate him in a district of roughly 650,000 people than they did both of Corbett’s state wide elections.
I’m surprised that Taniel didn’t mention at all voters’ reaction to Gerlach’s opportunism and office-hopping. Schroder was quick to hit him that he sees his congressional seat as a “consolation prize”.
Even if Gerlach survives his primary, the Democrats will have this extra arrow in their quiver to use against him, in comparison with 2004/06 and ‘08.
Even if Gerlach survives his primary, the Democrats will have this extra arrow in their quiver to use against him, in comparison with 2004/06 and ‘08.
But Gerlach won all those years. And none of those years were good years for R’s. (Yes, I know Bush won, we won open Senate seats in the South, etc. but Bush lost Pennsylvania and we only gained a couple of house seats.)
Gerlach now has to be considered the favorite, the only wild card being if the primary hurts him and/or he loses the primary, neither of which is likely. Politicos will care about his run for Governor, but the are already D’s or R’s. Run-of-the-mill voters won’t care and given the year, Gerlach is strongly favored to win, although clearly not heavily so. Still, he’s the 4/1 favorite at this point.
I think Gerlach’s biggest problem is getting thru the GOP primary. He’s not what I define as a true Conservative, and therefore he’s vulnerable as a result. The Dems will be more fortunate to run against Schroder or Welch because Gerlach has a proven track record of defeating Democrats during hostile year. 2010 is a Republican year.
I think this actually helps Democrats. It will force Schoder to the right, and as a result, Gerlach. This is hardly better for either in this sort of district.
Anyway, it’s quite sad to say the Gerlach “has somewhat of a moderate profile”. His political standpoint would have been considered quite far to the right throughout Reagan’s years and 1994.
Cliff:
“Gerlach is strongly favored to win, although clearly not heavily so. Still, he’s the 4/1 favorite at this point”
Actually assuming that the primary is still contested its more like 50/50 because another Republican can do much more dmg than Democrats can and if Gerlach has to move to the right it will damage him greatly. PA-06 voted for Obama by double digits and it narrowly went for Kerry (at that time 2004 was a fairly pro GOP year) so just becasue Gerlach was able to survive 2006 and 2008 doesn’t mean he is more likely to survive this year because he has more credible opposotion both within his own party and against the Democrats. As I have said in my first comment, if Shroder drops out now, then Gerlach is favored in Novemenber, but if he is forced to slug it out in primary it will damage him.
No matter what plays out, it’s no worse than 50-50 for Democrats.
If the Dems couldn’t win this seat in 2006 and 2008, there is no way this race is no worse than 50-50 for the Dems.
Actually assuming that the primary is still contested its more like 50/50 because another Republican can do much more dmg than Democrats can and if Gerlach has to move to the right it will damage him greatly.
Wrong. Especially not in a district like this. With the advantage of incumbency, the primary won’t give him much problem at all. He won’t have to run to the right much at all, just vote against Health Care and other Obama spending initiatives and highlight that fact. And that won’t be unpopular in Pennsylvania come ‘10.
I’d like you to name me one Republican incumbent, with the possible exception of the kinda-sorta Republican Lincoln Chafee, who survived a serious primary challenge but was so damaged by it that he lost the general. And it wasn’t the fact that Chafee had to move too far to the right to win the primary.
With a strong GOP gubernatorial candidate, this could help the GOP in this House race. The US Senate race is more of a wildcard. If Sestak and Spector bloody themselves up enough, who knows. Apparently Sestak doesn’t have a campaign manager in place yet, not a very impressive way to run a campaign. Spector is tenacious enough that he could still pull this whole thing off. If Shroder stays in the House race, and if he wins the primary, which he would seem to have a good chance, Gerlach looking weakened already, then Shroder would have a very strong chance of keeping this seat. I don’t see the Dems running as well as Shroder.
If the Dems couldn’t win this seat in 2006 and 2008, there is no way this race is no worse than 50-50 for the Dems.
Correct.
Taniel, I count seven competitive Dem held open seats: TN-06, TN-08, KS-03, WA-03, PA-07, NH-02, and LA-03. I dont know where you are coming up with that eighth seat. If you are counting HI-01(a 72% Obama seat) as a competitive seat, you have to count FL-12 and possibly even KS-04 as competitive.
Check out this poll! Brown over Coakley! http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_MA_45398436.pdf.
This should be a warning to Obama/Reid/Pelosi that their socialistic ideology is not the answer, even in the liberal have of Massachusetts.
Ron,
I am indeed counting hi-01 because of the special election rules. The same ballot will feature two dems and one rep, with no primary. That is a major problem for dems obviously, as the GOP candidate could win with small plurality.
I’ll cover that stunning Mass poll tmrw.
Cicero makes Cliff look like a RINO. The only things that poll proves is how complacent/disinterested the Dems are and how inept a campaign Coakley has run.
Even so, there are two other polls coming out tomorrow that will her leading by 15 and 7 points respectively. When she decides to stop her vacations and start rallying the Democratic base, then this race will be over.
Cicero, you are laughable. You quote one poll that shows the GOP in MA in a tie with the Democratic candidate and say that the President’s policies are to blame. It is a special election. Turnout is obviously much reduced. The GOP base is energised, Dems are not. End of story.
You show you blatant bias by saying “This should be a warning to Obama/Reid/Pelosi that their socialistic ideology is not the answer, even in the liberal have of Massachusetts.” Do you really think in a normal election cycle (i.e. Nov 2010, Nov 2012 etc) that MA would not return a “normal” Dem (i.e. one with no major character defects)? Just as I would expect OK to always send a Republican senator.
You and others like to throw words around with incorrect meanings. If socialism is so bad and Obama is bringing it in. Why did the GOP introduce a prescription drug benefit? why did the GOP not cut spending? why didn`t the GOP eliminate the income tax? why didn`t the GOP get rid of the military healthcare system since that is “socialised”?
Taniel —
There’s also some new polling in Nevada and Kentucky that you might wsnt to address
I don’t care what words you throw at me, but I’m shocked that MA is not a Democratic blowout. This is, after all, Ted Kennedy’s seat. I’m floored that this race is even within single digits. Ted Kennedy, IMHO, was a great leader who would have saved the Democrats from their rocky attempt at this sloppy legislation. Kennedy also knew how to reach out to the people on the other side of the aisle, which is now somewhat extinct.
The only poll was a Republican one,and they are milking it for all they can. (Good politics if it works). The Dems can’t be complacent here, imagine if Brown won, (highly unlikely), and he takes office a day or so later. Uh oh, healthcare still isn’t done. Again, not likely, but I am not the type to leave things to chance. For the record, I am a Democrat, but more Libertarian. Pelosi and Reid aren’t getting the job done. With both parties polling fairly low on the nation scene, I shudder to think what will happen in November. Instead of having a meeting with the House Dems about healthcare, they should have stayed back in DC and finished this thing already. I know it is far from perfect, but it can be fixed later; in the meantime, too much other business isn’t being done. We are living in a world economy more than ever, we need to debate and discuss how our nation and our businesses and people can survive and prosper. This is what is on everyone’s minds.
Cicero: This should be a warning to Obama/Reid/Pelosi that their socialistic ideology is not the answer, even in the liberal have of Massachusetts.
I don’t know what’s going to happen in Massachusetts (perhaps the poll is indicative of a close race, perhaps it’s a statistical outlier as one in 20 polls are), but to label Democratic priorities as “socialistic ideology” shows a failure to engage in serious discussion and a preference to recycle false talking points instead.
The health care bill, in whatever form, is extremely modest. The doctors are private, the insurers are private, most hospitals are private. Even health care in many of our peer nations is not “socialized” medicine. But we are the only ones who don’t cover everyone and still spend far more than our peer nations doing so, while not getting any better overall outcomes. It’s about time we caught up.
The stimulus package was backed by many conservative as well as liberal economists. Really, sometimes I feel if today’s Republicans were in charge during the Great Depression, we’d still be in it: the banks would have been allowed to fail (don’t interfere with the market!), people would have lost their deposits and not put them back in banks (no FDIC), and unemployment would have been even more rampant (no jobs programs).
And it’s not socialistic to propose marginal tax rates similar to where they were during the Clinton years–unless we as a nation were socialists then too, which I hear no one arguing–or banking regulations designed to prevent the system from collapsing again.
Unless one thinks this is what socialism looks like, http://correspondents.theatlantic.com/conor_clarke/2009/06/what_socialism_looks_like.php, please put away the tired scare words and lets debate the issues on the merits.
Cicero’s choice of words aside, I think we can all agree that PPP’s poll is fairly shocking and shouldn’t be minimized. Especially because: (1) Gerard, PPP is a Democratic firm, not a Republican firm. (2) Panos, the Herald poll that has Coakely up 7% (as you mentioned) also reportedly has her leading by only 1% among likely voters.
All other polling will be addressed later today.
About Pennsylvania: (1) repubvoter, you are right that I had no poll testing Gerlach in mind when I wrote that. What I meant is that Corbett has no electability problem since he has huge leads against all Democrats in most polls that are taken. Had Gerlach been tested, he would have been unlikely to have such leads by virtue alone of his lower name recognition. (2) Panos, I didn’t make too much of the fact that he can now be accused of office-hopping because my impression is that type of charge usually doesn’t do too much against a candidate.
I’m glad Taniel pointed out that PPP is not a Republican pollster.
I think the Democrats will end up winning this race, but this is not the type of news that the Democratic leadership needs. I bet you will see the Democratic leadership moderate legislation for the rest of the years.