Archive for the 'SC-05' Category

Retirement clues

Published
by
Taniel
on February 4, 2010
in FL-10, OH-12, SC-05 and VA-10
. 12 Comments

Since open seats have played a major role in determining the shape of the cycle, it would be good to take a look as to what shoes might still drop in the coming months.

On the Senate front, the only incumbent who might choose to retire for reasons unrelated to the prospect of a tough loss is 85-year old Dan Inouye, but as I discussed recently the Hawaii senator has certainly dropped no hints he might call it quits so Democrats seem safe. Meanwhile, Harry Reid and Blanche Lincoln are now both regularly fielding questions about whether they intend to stick to their re-election races given their dismal poll numbers; I find it hard to believe either would step aside, and unlike in Connecticut, Democrats have no obvious savior.

On the gubernatorial front, there are already so many open seats it’s tough to come up with any more incumbents who might choose not to run. The only one who might do so is David Paterson, though the New York Governor has looked determined not to leave the field to Andrew Cuomo. There has also been some minimal speculation that Chet Culver and Ted Strickland might retire rather than face the prospect of a loss, but it’s tough to see how Democrats could do better in Iowa given that their trouble come from Terry Branstad’s entry while Strickland’s woes are not pronounced enough for his retirement to make much sense.

That leaves us with House races, in which the number of additional open seats will be decisive in determining how serious a shot Republicans have of regaining the majority. Based on the past few cycles, we are unlikely to get that many more retirements in the coming months but there are many congressmen we should keep an eye on, namely Ike Skelton, Peter DeFazio, Paul Kanjorski, Tim Holden on the Democratic side, Bill Young on the Republican side.

In addition, Democrats like John Spratt and Collin Peterson have ruled out retiring but they are worth still tracking. Finally, surprise retirements are possible, though it is worth noting that most of the Democrats who recently called it quits - Berry, Snyder, Gordon - had at least been mentioned as potential retirees. [Update: I should add the 68-year old Rep. Bill Delahunt, who represents the most Republican district in Massachusetts and who is now being mentioned as a potential retiree.]

Fundraising totals often offer interesting clues as to which incumbents might not be looking to run for re-election. Now that we can parse through the 4th quarter totals, we can glean new hints. To be sure, a congressman raising little money does not mean they are planning to call it quits, nor do big fundraising hauls indicate that they will run again. But they can certainly point us in useful directions; Jodi Rell’s 3rd quarter report, for instance, foreshadowed her decision to retire.

The most eyebrow-raising number once again belongs to 79-year old Bill Young, the longest serving House Republican who represents a swing district and has not committed to seek a 21st term in 2010. Young raised just $750 in the fourth quarter; even lower than the $3,900 he raised in the third quarter. It’s not like Young is averse to soliciting funds, like John Hostettler or Vic Snyder. In 2007, he raised 5 times more than he has in 2009 - and he was not facing a competitive opponent as he is this cycle.

That said, state Senator Charlie Justice has not caught fire, which might encourage Young to think that he would not have to break much more of a sweat than he is used in his largely competition-free38 years in Congress. In early January, speculation mounted that Young was about to call it quits; the fact that he did not do so might also signal he is willing to press ahead.

Other Republicans who had been considered potential (albeit unlikely) retirees are Frank Wolf (VA-10) and Pat Tiberi (OH-12). The former reported raising more than $180,000 while Tiberi is trumpeting the $440,000 he raised in the fourth quarter. With Ohio’s filing deadline looming later in February, the time has come to strike him off our retirement watch. (Note that Tiberi is a rare House Republican to face a top-tier challenge next year.)

On the Democratic side, the number that is producing the most buzz is that of John Spratt (SC-05). While Spratt said in December he would seek another term, the $77,000 he raised in the fourth quarter don’t point to an incumbent who is seriously preparing for the hard fought race Spratt is sure to face; it is also far lower than what Spratt reported in previous cycles.

On the other hand, a number of Democratic incumbents whom the GOP has been ardently hoping will retire are proceeding like they are running. Most significant is 78-year old Ike Skelton’s $492,000, which certainly suggests he is taking his 2010 challenge very seriously. There is also no reason for Democrats to be alarmed at Baron Hill, who reported $251,000. (The filing deadline is looming.) Leonard Boswell (IA-03)’s $180,000 is a higher number than he did in the last three months of 2007 and Colin Peterson topped $100,000, which is not negligeable considering he is not facing a competitive race.

Interestingly: Rep. Marion Berry, who announced his retirement a month after the end of the fourth quarter, reported raising $73,000, which might have been a hint since that was less than he reported in 2007, a cycle in which he was entirely unopposed.

Five crucial House races taking shape

Published
by
Taniel
on January 28, 2010
in AR-02, AR-08, KS-04, PA-10 and SC-05
. 4 Comments

AR-02: Democratic candidate jumps in

Democrats have deep benches in the newly open Arkansas districts, which means their primaries are likely to be heated showdowns between some of the state party’s biggest name. The possibility that Lieutenant Governor Brian Halter and Wesley Clark might run in AR-2 did not dissuade House Speaker Robbie Wills to announce his candidacy yesterday. He joins state Sen. Joyce Elliott, who is likely to be the primary’s more liberal option; Wills, meanwhile, seems to be a mainstream Arkansas Democrat, which also means he is not as conservative as Senate Majority Leader Bob Johnson, who is also mentioned as a potential candidate.

At this point, there is no buzz that Republicans might try to find an alternative to former U.S. Attorney Tim Griffin. While I know some of you don’t think his prominent role in the U.S. Attorney’s scandal could hurt him, the GOP could try to find a candidate with less baggage; last year Griffin looked as formidable a challenger as the GOP could dream of, but it’s a whole new ball game by now.

PA-10: Carney lands additional challenger

Speaking of former U.S. Attorneys, yet another decided to put his name on the ballot this fall: Thomas Marino announced he would challenge Rep. Chris Carney. Just like Griffin, Marino was forced to resign in 2007, though his exit was not caused by the scandal that erupted around the Bush administration but rather by his ties to Louis DeNaples, whose aggressive efforts to secure a casino license made him the target of a government probe. That is sure to haunt him on the campaign trail; in fact, Democrats have already gone all-out on the issue. (Marino also faces a competitive primary, most notably against Snyder County Commissioner Malcolm Der.)

Carney is apparently very happy letting Democratic Party officials do the dirty work while he portrays himself above the fray. In the statement he released following Marino’s entry in the race, Carney chose instead to highlight the fact that Republicans tried to convince him to switch parties back in December as proof of his independent streak. “Congressman Carney is proud of his bipartisan record in Congress and was flattered to have recently been approached by Sen. John McCain and other Republican leaders about switching parties,” the statement said. “He believes, however, that his job is not about a political party.” This was something everyone saw coming as soon as we read reports about the GOP’s outreach; Republicans really shoot themselves in the foot on this one.

AR-08: Giffords lands her first one

It looked like Rep. Gabrielle Giffords would be one junior Democrat who would not face too difficult a re-election race, but the GOP has put competitive AZ-08 on the map by recruiting state Sen. Jonathan Paton. The 38-year Paton has only been serving in the state Senate for a year (he was in the state House before), but his decision to run suggests he is really confident he can pull victory: Arizona law requires state politicians to resign if they want to seek another office, so Paton will now have to leave his job in order to challenge Giffords.

Yet, Giffords has won her first two races with surprising ease - both were double-digit victories, which means she considerably overperformed relatively to Barack Obama’s performance - and she’s one of House Democrats’ most successful fundraisers. Furthermore, Arizona could be more or less susceptible to a red wave depending on who wins the GOP’s gubernatorial primary.

SC-05: PPP confirms a veteran congressman is vulnerable

One of the most powerful House Democrats, Budget Committee Chairman John Spratt has served for 28 years, which makes him as entrenched a congressman as it gets and which means he has survived tough national environments before. Yet, a new PPP survey finds that he is vulnerable to losing his red-leaning South Carolina district: Not only is his approval rating in negative territory (41-42) but he is under 50% against both of his Republican opponents; he tops state Senator Mick Mulvaney 46% to 39% and leads Albert Spencer 46% to 37%.

Given the number of Democratic incumbents who have been trailing by decisive margins - think Reid, Lincoln, Snyder, Driehaus, Hill - for Spratt to post a 7% lead against a state Senator does suggest his standing is better than that of other congressmen; but the fact that such numbers might in any way be spun as good news for Democrats speaks to how rough a landscape they are facing. On the other hand, the poll also finds that Obama has a stronger approval rating than you might expect in districts that voted for John McCain by 7% (46-49).

KS-04: The best defense is offense

Given the environment, a staunchly red Kansan district that voted for Bush by 32% and for McCain by 18% is the last place you would expect Democrats to try and mount an offense. Yet, the DCCC has been so excited by state Rep. Raj Goyle’s candidacy in the open KS-04 that they’ve included the district in the list of their 16 top offensive targets! Goyle has been raising large sums of money for a House challenger; he just reported more than $250,000 in the fourth quarter, and he outraised the most prolific Republican 4:1 in the 3rd quarter. But is this a case in which national parties’ obsessive focus on fundraising strength makes them overstate their chances?

Whatever Goyle’s merits, he has been in the state legislature for only 2 years (so it’s not like he is an entrenched political figure) and if he picked up the seat KS-04 would become one of the most conservative districts represented by a Democrat; is that likely to happen in 2010, especially in a state in which the GOP will enjoy huge victories in statewide elections? It’s good of the DCCC to seek to counter  the narrative that it is stuck playing defense, but it would certainly be a huge surprise if Goyle can make the race close.

Dems apparently avoid the open seat they were most worried about

Published
by
Taniel
on December 21, 2009
in IN-09 and SC-05
. 0 Comments

Due to holiday-period traveling, I’ll be keeping posting today light.

Once again, the week starts with conversations about House retirements - but for once, the news is good for Democrats. The congressman whose potential retirement has long been worrying the DCCC - Budget Committee Chairman John Spratt, a 28-year incumbent who represents a tough districts - has for the first time signaled he’ll seek re-election: He just filed paperwork with the F.E.C. and Spratt later gave a direct statement to the press. “I’m still a committee chairman. I have a possibility of being chair of another committee,” he said. “There’s lots of reasons for me to keep on serving.”

(While South Carolina’s filing deadline is in March, which leaves Spratt a little time to change his mind, we are getting close enough to the deadline that he probably would not issue such definite statements if he was not committed to the race.)

Last week, when the DCCC managed to get numerous incumbents to confirm they would be seeking another term in 2010, Spratt’s office was conspicuously silent and numerous press outlets reported that he had told Democratic officials he might call it quits. As such, Spratt’s announcement today is a huge relief for the party: His predominantly rural district would have been tough to defend in any cycle, let alone in one that could be rough on Democrats. (SC-05 voted for John McCain by 7% and for George W. Bush by 14%.)

An open seat race would have been all the more fascinating to follow because SC-05 is the sort of Southern district that never completed its realignment because it was represented by an entrenched Democrats by the time 1994 came around. (Spratt only survived by 5%.) It has never elected a Republican since Reconstruction, and Democrats control many of the area’s local offices.

That Spratt is running for re-election doesn’t mean the strength of the district’s ancestral allegiance to the Democratic Party won’t be tested: state Senator Mike Mulavey has been running against Spratt, and he could provide the veteran lawmaker the toughest test of his career. In an anti-incumbent mood, Spratt’s position as the head of the Budget Committee could help the NRCC mobilize fiscally conservative voters’ against him; also, his electability largely depends on turnout among African-Americans, who make up 33% of the district’s electorate, and we’ll have to see how mobilized the Democratic base is next year.

One factor that should reassure Democrats, however: Unlike many of his longtime colleagues who represent tough districts, Spratt was recently tested - and he came off confirming that he has strong standing in the district: : In 2006, then-state Rep. Ralph Norman ran against him, spent $1 million but still lost by double-digits. Sure, 2006 was a dismal environment for the GOP but Spratt’s triumph is more than Democrats like Snyder can point to.

Finally, a Spratt retirement could truly have opened the gates to retirements from marginal Democrats since it would have signaled even the most powerful House members are not looking forward to serving in the upcoming Congress. Instead, the DCCC has been getting many members to commit to running at this point.

Another Democratic incumbent confirmed that he’ll be seeking re-election: Rep. Baron Hill. This is not a surprise, since I was unable to envision Hill retiring now that he finally gets to run without having to face Mike Sodrel (he did four cycles in a row), but for some reason his name kept popping up in retirement discussions. His decision allows Democrats not to worry about IN-9, a red-leaning district that took a dramatic leftward turn in 2008.

DCCC seeks to counter expectation of mounting Dem retirements

Published
by
Taniel
on December 15, 2009
in MN-07, MO-04, PA-17, SC-05, TN-04 and TX-17
. 7 Comments

Following the streak of four Democratic retirements in as many weeks, all eyes are on veteran lawmakers who represent marginal districts and who might be tempted to follow the likes of John Tanner and Brat Gordon out the door. Today, the DCCC pushed back by getting a number of such Democrats to go on the record as ruling out a retirement.

There are a number of reasons the DCCC would want to counter the growing expectations that it will face a mounting number of Democratic retirements. For one, this can slow down the narrative of an embattled party that risks losing its majority, which would only create a downward spiral, depress donors and embolden Republicans. Second, the NRCC has been circling around around any Democrats who are mentioned as a potential retirees in the hope of pressuring them into retirement; for a congressman to go on the record as committed to seeking another term can get them temporarily off the GOP’s priority list. Third, the expectation that a congressman will retire can give momentum to his declared opponents, who will raise money off of the rumors that they’ll be running in an open seat and thus be stronger candidates if the incumbent remains in the race after all.

The most definitive and trustworthy push back came from Rep. Chet Edwards, who occupies the most Republican district represented by a Democrat: It is fairly incredible that he managed to survive Tom DeLay’s redistricting, which put him in a district that gave Bush 70% of the vote in 2004 and gave John McCain 67% of the vote last year. Needless to say, an open seat in TX-17 would be a near-certain GOP pick-up. Thankfully for the DCCC, Edwards’s camp made it clear today he will be on the 2010 ballot.

Why do I say this development is the most definitive of the list? Texas’s filing period has already started, and the deadline is coming up in just 3 weeks! It is impossible Edwards (who is no Lieberman) would be bluffing this late in the process, so this is one announcement Democrats can trust.

Second is Rep. Collin Peterson, the powerful Minnesota Blue Dog who chairs the Agriculture Committee. Just a few days ago, Peterson hinted that he would not make a final decision until February but he released a statement today blasting those who would suggest that this waiting period is anything but a formality: “I’m running for re-election and anyone who knows me knows that what I’m doing now is what I’ve always done. My paperwork is on file and in February I’ll make an official announcement.”

Third, fourth and fifth are Rep. Ike Skelton, Rep. Tim Holden and Rep. Lincoln Davis whose spokespeople told the press that their bosses would seek another term next year. All three represent red district. Davis might be getting lonely, since two of his fellow Tennessee Democrats announced they would leave Congress in recent weeks; Holden is still relatively young (52), but he was on the NRCC’s list of potential retirees; Skelton, finally, is the 78-year old chair of the House Armed Services Committee. His retirement would have not only sent shock waves through the Democrats’ seniority ranks, but also given the GOP a golden shot at a district that gave McCain 61% of the vote.

We should continue to track of these incumbents (except Edwards, and arguably Peterson, who made it pretty clear he expects to run again). Spokespeople routinely insist that their boss will run for re-election, and it does not always play out that way. After all, incumbents like Holden and Skelton might be hoping to get the GOP off their back while they finish making up their mind. That said, none of them were forced to come out with such statements and they must be at the very least leaning against retiring if they did; it should also calm anxious DCCC officials and give pause to the growing narrative about panic in Blue Dog ranks.

On the other hand, we also learned today that Budget Committee Chairman John Spratt is not committing to running in 2010; this is I believe the first time we get confirmation that he is mulling a retirement. This would be a particularly big blow to Democrats: While seats like TN-6 and LA-3 would be tough holds in any environment, SC-5 (which gave John McCain 53%) is the type of red-leaning district in which the party could have a very good shot at playing defense in a neutral environment.

No open seat doesn’t mean safe seat

Of course, that one of these Democrats chooses not to retire does not mean their districts will remain Democratic. In particular, TX-17 looks like a tough hold. In late November, the NRCC suffered a rare recruitment blow when state Sen. Steve Ogden announced he would not run but businessman Bill Flores is now set to enter the race with his vast fortune: He has already promised half-a-million dollars. This is such a GOP district that any Republican starts with a large share of the vote while Edwards has practically no base to rely on. In 2008, Edwards’s opponent received 46% of the vote after running a low-profile campaign; Flores’s millions could help turn TX-17’s voters against the incumbent and channel conservative anger to ensure Edwards receives less cross-over support than he’s used to.

The NRCC has also been determined to include Skelton to its target list: While the Missouri Democrat has topped 60% in all but one of his reelection races, his district has been trending red - it gave McCain 61% after giving Bush 60% in 2000. Former state Rep. Hartzler, who has devoted herself to socially conservative caucuses, is challenging Skelton; she should not pause much of a challenge in normal conditions but if the environment is as toxic for Democrats as the GOP is hoping, she could motivate the Republican base enough to score an upset.

As for the other names on this list: Lincoln Davis does not seem like he should have that much to fear from physician Scott DesJarlais but his district did go for McCain by 29%, and Tim Holden and Collin Peterson should be out of the GOP’s reach if they indeed seek another term. Neither PA-17 nor MN-07 are conservative enough to be top Republican priorities, and the NRCC did suffer a recruitment failure against Holden.

NRCC tries to showcase map expansion efforts

Published
by
Taniel
on November 20, 2009
in AR-02, IA-03, MD-01 and SC-05
. 1 Comment

In case you were wondering what is the one thing the NRCC would like to see congealed as conventional wisdom, its attempt to get minuscule ad buys in 3 districts held by veteran Democrats covered as a major strategic move should give you the answer: Republicans want to show they are serious about expanding the playing field so that the prospect of a red wave is treated seriously, which would in turn allow them to have an easier time recruiting and fundraising in marginal districts.

Who are the three Democrats the NRCC chose for this somewhat artificial demonstration? Rep. Vic Snyder (AR-02), Rep. John Spratt (SC-05) and Rep. Earl Pomeroy (ND-AL). All three have served in the House for a long time (respectively 12, 16 and 26 years); all three represent districts that twice voted for George W. Bush and then for John McCain; none of them has faced a competitive challenge in recent cycles.

The spots attack these 3 Democrats for voting for health-care reform, so they could be a preview of what the NRCC has in store for its 2010 advertisement. (Here’s the one aimed at Snyder.) But the people the NRCC is aiming at are not swing voters but political observers like you and me - people who in seeing these ads might themselves: “Wow, the NRCC must be really serious about targeting just about any Democrat if they’re willing to spend money on Pomeroy despite the fact that he faces no top-tier opposition.” (Of course, Spratt and Snyder do face tougher challenges, the former from state Senator Mike Mulvaney and the latter from former U.S. Attorney Tim Griffin.)

The bottom-line: Given that the NRCC’s fundraising troubles haven’t been resolved this cycle - far from it - they are in no position to buy actually air time for now. As such, there’s little use for them to waste money at this point on districts like Tom Perriello or Steve Driehaus’s (no one disputes that these Democrats are highly vulnerable next year, so there’s nothing to prove) whereas symbolic buys that will at least showcase their determination to expand the map could have more value.

One more veteran Democrat targeted, this time in Iowa

Republicans are sure optimistic enough that they continuing to try to throw all they’ve got at the wall and see what sticks. Their latest target in the ranks of entrenched Democratic incumbents is Rep. Leonard Boswell (IA-03), who the GOP has long considered weak; at 75, Boswell has spent decades in politics (though only 12 years in the House) and he could be vulnerable if the electorate is an anti-incumbent mood. This week, two prominent Republicans made it clear they will run in 2010: former Iowa State University wrestling coach Jim Gibbons and second-term state Senator Brad Zaun; both would make strong challengers.

That said, the GOP faces a number of major obstacles to making this race competitive. For one, IA-03 is not a conservative district (Barack Obama won a 10% victory, and the district was split roughly equally in 2000 and 2004); much of the GOP’s tune has been that the Democratic brand is growing so unpopular that incumbents sitting in red districts will be submerged, but Boswell does not enter in that group.

Second, and here again unlike other veteran Democrats who are being targeted, Boswell did face a competitive race recently: He beat state Senator Jeff Lamberti in what was one of 2006’s hottest races. While he was surely helped by the national environment, that doesn’t erase the fact that this forced him to remember how to campaign, stay in touch with the base and keep a ground infrastructure that should serve him next year. In short, the GOP cannot count on the element of surprise in this district. 

Finally, desmoinesdem points out that the stakes might not be particularly high in this race: In 2011, Iowa will lose a district and the independent redistricting commission is widely expected to remedy the situation by roughly combining this district and Republican Rep. Latham’s IA-04. It’s unlikely that Boswell would then choose to seek re-election, which means that Latham will be favored to win the new IA-03 in 2012 no matter who wins this year.

Believe it or not, but the GOP also targets freshmen

Meanwhile, one junior Democrat who is in serious danger next year is Rep. Frank Kratovil. In 2008, Kratovil won a tiny victory in a district McCain won by 18%, mostly because of dramatic divisions among Republicans. State Senator Andy Harris is now back for a rematch, and he can count not only on a more favorable environment but also on the fact that the deep wounds of last year’s primary will be forgotten by November 2010. To make sure people take his bid seriously rather than dismiss him as a poor candidate who might again ruin the GOP’s chances, released an internal poll today: It shows him leading Kratovil 52% to 39%. Sure, partisan surveys should always be taken with a big grain of salt, but that sure is a big margin.

In South Carolina, one more veteran Democrat targeted by the NRCC

Published
by
Taniel
on October 10, 2009
in SC-05
. 5 Comments

Earlier this week, state Senator Mick Mulvaney signaled he is preparing to challenge Rep. John Spratt, who has been in office since 1982. This makes South Carolina’s 5th District the latest in a series of red-leaning districts represented by entrenched Democrats that the NRCC is determined to wrestle away.

Just as in AR-01, MO-04 and WV-01 (other districts with similar situations), the GOP’s excitement over Mulvaney’s challenge confirms their unyielding optimism about the coming cycle: While there is no evidence that any of them are vulnerable, Republicans are betting that the environment will favor them to such an extent that a red wave will submerge veteran Democratic lawmakers. The NRCC must realize that it won’t manage to force all of these veteran lawmakers in competitive races, but there’s no other way of knowing which are endangered than throwing all they’ve got at the wall and seeing what sticks.

SC-05 is Republican enough that a wave could surely cause Democrats heartburn: it voted for Bush by double-digits and for McCain 53% to 46%. A state Senator running in a district that leans towards his party is necessarily credible, and if there is indeed a red wave it could very well take Spratt with it: in 1994, Spratt survived by only 5%. That he now occupies a position of great power (he chairs the Budget Committee) could hurt him more than help him if voters turn against Congress as much as they did that year. Finally, Democratic electability in this district depends in large part on black turnout (a third of the district is African-American) and we will have to see how mobilized the Democratic base is next year.

(For those keeping track of vulnerable Democrats’ ideological leanings: Like most of the entrenched congressmen finding themselves in the GOP’s cross hairs, Spratt is moderate-to-conservative but he is not a member of the Blue Dog Coalition.)

Yet, there are a number of differences that put Spratt in a better position than his colleagues in aforementioned districts.

For one, his district is not overwhelmingly conservative; a 7% margin for McCain is nowhere comparative than the 20%+ victories he scored in AR-01 or MO-04. Relatedly, Obama substantially improved Gore and Kerry’s performance in this district; that cannot be said of many of the red districts the GOP is hoping to reclaim, from AL-02 and MS-01 to AR-01 and MO-04. Democratic performance in SC-05 is not simply a factor of ancestral party allegiance that is collapsing post-Obama’s emergence as the party’s standard-bearer.

Also, the GOP won’t be able to rely on the most important factor that sometimes gets entrenched incumbents like Spratt in trouble: the element of surprise. In 2006, a number of Republican incumbents had forgotten how to run competitive races and did not have the infrastructure in place to fight back when it became clear they were vulnerable late in the cycle. But Spratt recently faced a competitive race: In 2006, then-state Rep. Ralph Norman ran against him, spent $1 million but still lost by double-digits. Sure, 2006 was a dismal environment but that contest must have reminded Spratt of how to run a campaign and mount an infrastructure.

Finally, it’s difficult to know what voters think about their congressmen absent some type of challenge, a problem that applies to Skelton or Snyder: Since they have not faced a competitive challenge in at least 10 years, Democrats cannot point to any concrete signs that the NRCC is wasting its time targeting them. But Spratt can point to the 2006 race as evidence he is not vulnerable, thereby potentially discouraging Republican donors and avoiding that the NRCC devotes that much attention to the race.

None of this means that Mulvaney doesn’t have a very good reason to jump in this race, as speculation is already rampant he is doing so to prepare 2012: The Palmetto Scoop writes that Spratt is expected to retire in 2012 and ambitious Republicans want to position themselves to be the heir apparent in what would be a top-tier takeover opportunity for their party. 2006 nominee Norman had for now positioned himself as that heir apparent, but Mulvaney’s candidacy next year shuffles the deck, especially as Norman is no longer in the state legislature.

I am unsure that Spratt is this close to retirement, since he is now only 66, but it’s only a matter of time before the GOP gets a shot at an open seat here. Of course, that there is talk that Republicans are mainly preparing for the post-2010 landscape is not a good sign for Mulvaney’s prospects of being taken as a top-tier challenger.