Some Congressional Republicans Are Running For The Exits
August 18th, 2007
By JOE GANDELMAN, Editor-In-Chief
Some Republican office holders are now running for the political exits faster than Bush administration members are leaving to spend more time with their families:
A rash of retirements among House Republicans is adding to the party’s electoral challenges and raising questions about a rush for the exits.
Four House Republicans — Representatives J. Dennis Hastert and Ray LaHood, both of Illinois; Deborah Pryce of Ohio; and Charles W. Pickering Jr. of Mississippi — have all announced in recent days that they will not seek re-election next year, worrying Republican leaders anxious to hold back a potential wave of retirements after the loss of their majority in 2006. Mr. Hastert, the former speaker, Mr. LaHood and Ms. Pryce were all well-liked leaders within their party.
“I think our party’s chances for winning the majority back next time are pretty bleak at the moment,†Mr. LaHood said in an interview, “and I will admit to you that being in the minority is less fun.â€
“People are going to continue to have heartburn over the war,†he said. “Democrats will win the White House, hold their majority in the House and in the Senate in 2008, and then in 2010 we will have an extraordinary opportunity in the off-year of a Democratic presidency and Congressional majorities to possibly win it back. But it is not going to happen the next time,†in 2008.
And, of course, there is a (what else) dispute over all of the above:
Julie Shutley, a spokeswoman for the House Republican campaign committee, called the retirements “normal and to be expected.†Ms. Shutley said that in each of the last three elections about 30 lawmakers, including members of both parties, had chosen to retire. Predictions of mass Democratic retirements after the Republicans took over in 1994 “never materialized,†she said.
That may depend on one’s perspective. Forty-nine House members did not seek re-election in 1996, and 28 were Democrats — 28 being nearly double the usual number.
Republicans gained 10 of those 28 seats, and that was in a year when President Bill Clinton won re-election at the top of the ticket and Democrats gained seats over all.
“2008 is likely to be a tougher year for Republicans than 1996 was for Democrats,†said David Wasserman, who tracks House races for the Cook Political Report, a newsletter.
Representative Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, chairman of the House Democratic campaign committee, argued that the retirements would contribute to a “psychology†of demoralization among Republicans.
“If the past is prologue here, we can expect to see a lot more than the average number of retirements after an election,†Mr. Van Hollen said. “And every vacancy creates opportunities.â€
The bottom line is that throughout history, political control has been a see-saw. Karl Rove hoped to slow that process way down or even freeze it. But political cycles inexorably change.
What now seems undeniable (but will be disputed by some anyway, given the role of partisan spin) is that the U.S. appears to be entering into a period of a political cycle change. Even though polls show Democratic support squishy (a key factor is the Democrats re-gaining a huge chunk of independent voter support), the Bush administration remains under fire and beset with various problems, administration officials are gradually leaving, polls show younger voters now more sympathetic to liberals and Democrats, and Republican party registration and contributions are down.
Another factor why a spin theme of “Oh, well it doesn’t mean that much really” doesn’t hold water is this:
Senate Republicans may face a special challenge because they have so many seats to defend. Of the 34 Senate seats up for election next year, about two-thirds are occupied by Republicans. That means 22 of 49 Republican senators will be running.
All during a time when the Bush administration continues to disappoint or anger key groups of voters.
And then, of course, there’s the war in Iraq. Will the long-awaited report on the “surge” that was touted as going to be written by a top general but actually will now be written by the White House help turn this dramatically around?
This entry was posted on Saturday, August 18th, 2007 at 7:58 am and is filed under Senate, Bush Administration, Independents, Republicans, Democrats, 2008 Elections, Congress, Independent Voters, Politics. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
