Democrats "Party Of No" GOP Attacks No Longer Effective...Decision 2009

Democrats Revive "Party of No" Attack


Democrats are retooling and reprising their “Party of No” attack on Republicans in Congress after they unanimously rejected financial reform and health care bills in votes this month.

But already, analysts are questioning whether charges of GOP obstructionism will be enough to keep voters from taking out their angst over the economy on Democrats next fall.

Last week, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee began making robocalls against Republicans in four districts in Florida, Michigan and Pennsylvania for opposing a Democratic plan to tighten regulation of banks and financial services firms widely blamed for last year’s economic meltdown.

“Remember? We said it can’t happen again. But did you know Congressman [Mario] Diaz-Balart (R-Fla.) voted to let Wall Street continue the same risky practices that crippled retirement accounts and cost taxpayers $700 billion, including unchecked bonuses and salaries for executives?” says the call, which was first reported by the Miami Herald. “Maybe the $81,204 he got from financial special interests mattered more than taxpayers.”

The recorded messages come on the heels of 60-second radio ads the DCCC rolled out in five districts in California, Nebraska and Pennsylvania highlighting the same Dec. 11 vote in which no Republican backed the regulation package.

The salvos come as other Democrats say they plan to paint Republicans as obstructionist for their down-the-line opposition to Senate health care legislation Thursday.

“History will judge harshly those who have chosen the simple path of obstruction over the hard work of making change. It always does,” said Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), an architect on the Senate financial reform bill.

“I think it’s a good argument for the Democrats. I just don’t think it will work,” said Stu Rothenberg of the non-partisan Rothenberg Political Report. “It is a good message if the fundamentals change. …The problem is, if the economy is not in good shape and people still don’t feel [a recovery], it’s going to be about Obama and about the Democrats. With Democrats controlling everything, and how active the administration has been on all these fronts, I just don’t think the Democrats are going to make it about the Republicans.”

Republican lawmakers insist they’re not worried about being slapped with a do-nothing label.

“Nobody's been an obstructionist. All we wanted to do was participate in the process,” Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) said on CNN during a back-and-forth over the health care bill. “I think [Democrats] deserve some credit for getting it done, as bad as it is. But it's going to wreck our country, I have to tell you. And people out there know that.”

A spokesman for the DCCC, Ryan Rudominer, said his committee’s message is not so much about Republican inertia as about the GOP siding with the very banks and financial institutions that many Americans blame for tanking the economy last fall.

“We’re hitting Republicans who are standing with Wall Street’s special interests instead of folks on Main Street,” Rudominer said. “While Democrats are standing up for the middle class, Republicans are standing up for the special interests…. Republicans have zero credibility when it comes to the economy considering it’s the very same Bush policies that created the economic mess in the first place that their party is trying to return to.”

There is little doubt the Democratic ads are intended to play on the mood of an angry electorate.

“Doesn’t that just make you mad?” the Democratic radio spots ask, after recounting the GOPer’s vote against regulatory reform.

“People are angry and what Democrats are trying to do is channel that anger,” said Democratic pollster Doug Schoen. “You’ve got to displace the anger onto the Republicans. If they can do that, Democrats have some hope but right now things are looking increasingly bleak every day.”

Schoen was blunt about the challenge Democrats are facing next fall. “The Democrats are trying to stem the bleeding,” the former pollster for President Bill Clinton said. “Obama’s in a free fall and, unless they stem the bleeding, they’re going to face unprecedented losses.”

One Democratic official said the party thinks its increasingly populist message will even resonate with some of the Tea Party activists steamed over government bailouts.

“Republicans are going to be hit from the right and the left on this. The Tea Party folks don’t like Obama or the Republican establishment. They don’t like Wall Street. And they don’t like Republicans standing with Wall Street,” said the official, who asked not to be named.

One prominent political analyst said the Democrats might get some traction with their latest message.

“With an angry electorate out there, populism could make a comeback in 2010. This kind of attack is made-to-order Democratic populism, targeting the big boys on Wall Street,” said Larry Sabato, the director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia. “This is a two-fer for Democrats. Swing voters are overwhelmingly anti-Wall Street, but the foremost task of the Democratic Party in 2010 is to re-motivate its 2008 Obama voters—the ones who didn’t show up in November 2009 in New Jersey and Virginia. Every issue that can stoke the emotions of core Democrats can help the party to reduce the enthusiasm gap that has opened up with the Republicans.”

However, GOP pollster Ed Goeas said he doesn’t think the Democrats’ strategy will peel off many potential Republican voters. Rather, Goeas said, it’s intended to buck up Democratic voters disenchanted with bickering over health care and other issues. “Most of that they’re trying to do is not dig the hole deeper for us, but raise the intensity of their base, which is very disenchanted at this point,” the GOP pollster said. He called anti-Bush appeals “fools’ gold,” which may excite some hardcore Democrats but will have increasingly little impact as time passes.

Rothenberg said the Democratic ads' references to “October 2008” and “the last months of the Bush presidency” already seem a bit old and may be all but irrelevant by next fall. “Ten percent unemployment will be of greater significance and greater salience. That’s the problem for Democrats,” the analyst said.

GOP strategist Scott Reed said, “I’m pretty upbeat about where things are at the end of the year for Republicans. I think it’s wishful thinking that the party-of-no is going to stick right now.”

“Clearly, Republicans want to be on the side of Main Street, not Wall Street,” Reed said, but he said voters are more likely to be focused on the economy generally and on widespread fears about government overspending. “I think the jury is still out on whether Democrats have overshot the runway….Next year is going to be a very long year.”



View Larger Map


Sources: Politico, DNC, Youtube, Zimbio, Huffington Post, MSNBC, Google Maps

Mayor Daley Tells Obama To Wake Up! Don't Ignore Moderate Dems! 2010 Losses

Mayor Daley: Keep The Big Tent Big


The announcement by Alabama Rep. Parker Griffith that he is switching to the Republican Party is just the latest warning sign that the Democratic Party -- my lifelong political home -- has a critical decision to make: Either we plot a more moderate, centrist course or risk electoral disaster not just in the upcoming midterms but in many elections to come.

Rep. Griffith's decision makes him the fifth centrist Democrat to either switch parties or announce plans to retire rather than stand for reelection in 2010. These announcements are a sharp reversal from the progress the Democratic Party made starting in 2006 and continuing in 2008, when it reestablished itself as the nation's majority party for the first time in more than a decade. That success happened for one major reason: Democrats made inroads in geographies and constituencies that had trended Republican since the 1960s. In these two elections, a majority of independents and a sizable number of moderate Republicans joined the traditional Democratic base to sweep Democrats to commanding majorities in Congress and to bring Barack Obama to the White House.

These independents and Republicans supported Democrats based on a message indicating that the party would be a true Big Tent -- that we would welcome a diversity of views even on tough issues such as abortion, gun rights and the role of government in the economy.

This call was answered not just by voters but by a surge of smart, talented candidates who came forward to run and win under the Democratic banner in districts dominated by Republicans for a generation. These centrists swelled the party's ranks in Congress and contributed to Obama's victories in states such as Indiana, North Carolina, Virginia, Colorado and other Republican bastions.

But now they face a grim political fate. On the one hand, centrist Democrats are being vilified by left-wing bloggers, pundits and partisan news outlets for not being sufficiently liberal, "true" Democrats. On the other, Republicans are pounding them for their association with a party that seems to be advancing an agenda far to the left of most voters.

The political dangers of this situation could not be clearer.

Witness the losses in New Jersey and Virginia in this year's off-year elections. In those gubernatorial contests, the margin of victory was provided to Republicans by independents -- many of whom had voted for Obama. Just one year later, they had crossed back to the Republicans by 2-to-1 margins.

Witness the drumbeat of ominous poll results. Obama's approval rating has fallen below 49 percent overall and is even lower -- 41 percent -- among independents. On the question of which party is best suited to manage the economy, there has been a 30-point swing toward Republicans since November 2008, according to Ipsos. Gallup's generic congressional ballot shows Republicans leading Democrats. There is not a hint of silver lining in these numbers. They are the quantitative expression of the swing bloc of American politics slipping away.

And, of course, witness the loss of Rep. Griffith and his fellow moderate Democrats who will retire. They are perhaps the truest canaries in the coal mine.

Despite this raft of bad news, Democrats are not doomed to return to the wilderness. The question is whether the party is prepared to listen carefully to what the American public is saying. Voters are not re-embracing conservative ideology, nor are they falling back in love with the Republican brand. If anything, the Democrats' salvation may lie in the fact that Republicans seem even more hell-bent on allowing their radical wing to drag the party away from the center.

All that is required for the Democratic Party to recover its political footing is to acknowledge that the agenda of the party's most liberal supporters has not won the support of a majority of Americans -- and, based on that recognition, to steer a more moderate course on the key issues of the day, from health care to the economy to the environment to Afghanistan.

For liberals to accept that inescapable reality is not to concede permanent defeat. Rather, let them take it as a sign that they must continue the hard work of slowly and steadily persuading their fellow citizens to embrace their perspective. In the meantime, liberals -- and, indeed, all of us -- should have the humility to recognize that there is no monopoly on good ideas, as well as the long-term perspective to know that intraparty warfare will only relegate the Democrats to minority status, which would be disastrous for the very constituents they seek to represent.

The party's moment of choosing is drawing close. While it may be too late to avoid some losses in 2010, it is not too late to avoid the kind of rout that redraws the political map. The leaders of the Democratic Party need to move back toward the center -- and in doing so, set the stage for the many years' worth of leadership necessary to produce the sort of pragmatic change the American people actually want.





Democrats Should Heed Daley's Steer-To-The-Center Advice


On the day before Christmas, President Obama found two presents under his tree. One was the health-care reform bill passed that morning by the Senate, a historic measure so freighted with promise and problems that it could blow up.

The other was an op-ed in The Post by William Daley, his fellow Chicagoan and one of the canniest Democrats I know, warning Obama that he is on the verge of losing his hold on the vital center of politics.

Daley, a former commerce secretary who shares with his brother, Mayor Richard M. Daley, and their late father an iron grip on reality, cited all the signs of defection among swing voters whose support in 2006 and 2008 swelled Democratic ranks in Congress and elected Obama.

He ticked off the losses Democrats suffered in the only two gubernatorial elections of 2009, in New Jersey and Virginia; the polls showing independents rejecting Democrats (and such handiwork as the health-care bill); a wave of early retirements by marginal House members; and, last week, the party switch by Alabama Rep. Parker Griffith from Democratic to Republican.

To be sure, there are counter-indicators not mentioned by Daley, including a string of special election congressional victories for the Democrats, culminating in New York's 23rd District. The Republican civil war that enabled this upset is symptomatic of a growing GOP liability that could cripple the party's comeback hopes.

But this does not weaken the thrust of Daley's main argument. His target is the left of his party -- the grass-roots liberal activists who condemn the centrist Democrats sitting in marginal seats for blocking some provisions of health-care reform, for example, and the leaders of organized labor who threaten to retaliate by withholding their support from the moderates.

These groups put heavy pressure on Obama to move his agenda to the left -- even when a Congress with swollen Democratic majorities is balking at the measures that Obama already has endorsed.

The president is surrounded by people who share Daley's grasp on reality, none more important or better placed than Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff and a fellow Chicagoan. But the picture is not so clear on the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's inner circle is made up of long-standing veterans of gerrymandered House districts, virtually immune from Election Day challenge, just as she is. The wants and needs of "the Democratic base" count heavily for them, and Daley's warnings may be resented or ignored.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's home-state party in Nevada is as closely tied to the unions as Michigan used to be in the days of Walter Reuther, and Reid views the world from that perspective.

As a loyal Democrat, Daley insisted in the closing paragraphs of his op-ed that his party is not doomed to ruin. It can still avoid anything more than a minimal setback in 2010, he said, if it will simply "acknowledge that the agenda of the party's most liberal supporters has not won the support of a majority of Americans -- and, based on that recognition . . . steer a more moderate course on the key issues of the day, from health care to the economy to the environment to Afghanistan."

I am not so certain. It will be up to Obama to steer the Democrats in that direction. No one on Capitol Hill is likely to lead such a change. The first test will come with the revisions of health care in the House-Senate conference and whether the White House insists on strengthening the cost-saving measures in the bills.

The larger tests will lie in Obama's 2010 State of the Union and budget messages -- whether he fulfills his promise to start addressing the runaway budget deficits left in the wake of the recession. A presidential endorsement of the much-discussed commission empowered to slow the hemorrhage of red ink would signal to voters that Daley's message has been heard.



View Larger Map


Sources: Washington Post, Politico, La Times, Google Maps

GOP's Top Brass Persuading Other Congressional Dems To Switch...Decision 2010

McCain, GOP Secretly Courting Another Dem To Switch


Republicans are stepping up their efforts to persuade more House Democrats to switch parties and are zeroing in on a second-term Pennsylvanian who is not ruling out such a move.

Democratic Rep. Chris Carney received a phone call Wednesday from Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) asking him to consider becoming a Republican, a top GOP official told POLITICO.

A spokesman for Carney declined to say if the congressman was considering such a switch.

“No further comment at this time,” said Carney spokesman Josh Drobnyk, who would only confirm that the call took place.

In a brief interview, McCain declined to offer details about the conversation.

“I just said, ‘Whatever you do, I know that you’ll make the right decision for the country,’” said the Arizonan.

A source familiar with the call said that Republicans thought Carney might be susceptible to McCain’s entreaty because, like the senator, the 50-year-old House member served in the Navy .

McCain’s call to Carney comes one day after freshman Alabama Democrat Parker Griffith announced that he was uncomfortable with his party’s direction and was becoming a Republican.

That House Republicans would deploy their party’s 2008 presidential standard-bearer to reach out to Carney underscores the sense of opportunity the GOP feels with the Griffith switch, along with polls showing voters turning sharply away from Democratic policies. So party officials are moving quickly to capitalize on the trend with other Democrats from conservative-leaning districts in hopes of creating a snowball effect.

“Politics is a momentum sport,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.).

A senior Republican said that the Senate GOP is expected to receive a list of party-switching targets.

But persuading colleagues to change sides is a delicate matter, often handled at the member level and with great discretion. The hope is to bag the quarry without being seen or heard trying to do so.

A top House Republican aide, wanting to avoid revealing a poaching patrol, downplayed the effort.

“You’ve got to have a willing partner; you don’t just hunt these guys down,” said the Republican. “They have to nudge you first.”

But the aide acknowledged that they had gotten “a nibble” from Carney and were now making the pitch that he’d be better off switching parties than running again as a Democrat in a northeastern Pennsylvania seat that President Obama lost by 9 percentage points last year.

Rep. Bill Shuster, a Pennsylvania Republican, is taking the lead on the effort to persuade his colleague to switch, said a GOP aide.

Carney, who is still a Commander in the Navy Reserve, represents a rural swath of northeastern Pennsylvania that was historically represented by Republicans, including such prominent figures as William Scranton and Joseph McDade.

But Carney knocked off scandal-plagued former GOP Rep. Don Sherwood in 2006 to capture the seat in the same year Democrats retook the congressional majority.

Before Carney’s upset win, Republicans held the seat for nearly four decades.

Carney hadn’t drawn a leading GOP opponent so far this year, but Republicans had been recruiting former U.S. Attorney Tom Marino to run for the seat. Marino met with the National Republican Congressional Committee last week, according to a GOP source.

Another leading candidate, state Rep. Mike Peifer, abruptly decided not to run against Carney this week.

“My family comes first,” Peifer told the Pike County Press. “We decided together that I would not run.”

Peifer did not respond to a phone call from POLITICO seeking comment.

Despite being a top GOP target and running in a district that McCain easily carried, Carney comfortably won re-election last year, taking 56 percent of the vote.

And in his two terms in the House, Carney, a Blue Dog, has been a fairly reliable leadership vote. He supported the stimulus earlier this year and recently provided a key vote on health care and financial regulation legislation — all bills that some of his conservative Democratic colleagues opposed.

Not all Conservative Democrats are up for grabs, though.

With Griffith’s announcement Tuesday, eyes immediately turned to his home state freshman counterpart, Rep. Bobby Bright.

But Bright told the House Democratic leadership Tuesday night that he planned to stay in the party, according to a senior Democratic aide.

Similarly, Rep. Walt Minnick (D-Idaho), another freshman Blue Dog who would be a prime target, indicated in a statement to POLITICO that he won’t switch.

“I will remain as Independent as Idaho, I will not be switching parties, and I will win in November,” Minnick said in the statement.



View Larger Map

Sources: Politico, Google Maps

Dems Angry Over Parker Griffith's Defection To GOP

Alabama Slammer: Democrats Fret Over Parker Griffith


The outlook for the 2010 elections just grew dimmer for Democrats, with the abrupt announcement Tuesday that Rep. Parker Griffith, an Alabama freshman, was jumping to the Republican Party.

While Griffith’s departure from the now 257-member Democratic Caucus will have almost no impact on the balance of power in the House, his party switch highlighted the growing unease among the Democratic Party’s most vulnerable members about the party’s ambitious national agenda and its role in contributing to the deteriorating political environment in which they must run for reelection.

Publicly, congressional Democrats mostly remained silent, a reflection of the unexpected timing—Griffith blindsided House leadership with the news and had even attended Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s pre-recess holiday party—and a desire to downplay the significance of his exit.

In the only statement issued by a top Democrat, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Chris Van Hollen simply asked for the party’s money back after devoting considerable resources to his 2008 election and reelection campaign.

"We were committed to helping Mr. Griffith deliver for his constituents and successfully helped Mr. Griffith fend off the personal attacks against him from the far right,” said Van Hollen in a statement. “Mr. Griffith, failing to honor our commitment to him, has a duty and responsibility to return to Democratic Members and the DCCC the financial resources that were invested in him. His constituents will hold him accountable for failing to keep his commitments.”

A Griffith spokesman confirmed to POLITICO Tuesday that DCCC money would be returned.

During last year’s election, the DCCC poured over $1 million into Alabama’s 5th Congressional District in an effort to fend off attacks on Griffith from the National Republican Congressional Committee and other conservative groups. Pelosi herself recently donated $2,000 to Griffith’s campaign coffers.

Martin Frost, a former DCCC chair who dealt with a handful of Democrat-to-Republican party switches during his late 1990s tenure, dismissed the significance of a single party-switching member.

“I don’t think one party switch means much of anything, quite frankly,” said Frost. “I’m sure the DCCC would rather no one switch, but one switch is not a big deal.”

“This is one guy in the south who’s made a political calculation. He could have won as Democrat and he felt it would be easier as a Republican,” said John Anzalone, an Alabama-based Democratic pollster.

Still, privately Democrats acknowledged the announcement came as a serious blow to a party that, over the last several election cycles, had made significant inroads in conservative southern districts like Griffith’s, which delivered 61 percent of the vote to John McCain in 2008 but nevertheless managed to elect a Democrat to an open House seat.

The situation is compounded by the worrisome recent uptick in retirements in politically competitive districts—among them veteran Southern Democrats like Tennessee Reps. John Tanner and Bart Gordon—and comes amidst troubling polling data for various Democratic incumbents.

“There’s a real backlash in the conservative districts against Washington and the president,” said one senior Democratic operative. “In any right-leaning district…you’re going to see the incumbent looking at numbers they’ve never seen before.”

“I just think it really shows the moderates feel they don’t have a voice in the party, they don’t like where we are going as a party, and that should be troubling for Democrats,” said another senior Democratic strategist. “Less than a year into a Washington that is controlled by Democrats, they’ve lost hope, they feel disillusioned, and they don’t think there’s anything to stick around for.”

On Tuesday morning, House Democratic leadership aides made rushed calls to at least two first-term members who frequently vote with Republicans—Reps. Walt Minnick of Idaho and Bobby Bright of Alabama—to gauge whether they were also planning to switch parties.

In a statement to POLITICO later in the day, Minnick said he had no plans to leave the Democratic caucus.

“Nothing should be read into or inferred about Congressman Bright’s future based on an individual decision by another member,” said Bright spokesman Lewis Lowe.

Griffith framed his announcement as a rebuke of Democratic leaders and the agenda they put forward during his first 10 months in office.

“Unfortunately there are those in the Democratic Leadership that continue to push an agenda focused on massive new spending, tax increases, bailouts and a health care bill that is bad for our healthcare system,” Griffith said in a statement. “I have always considered myself to be an independent voice and I have tried to be that voice in Congress—but after watching this agenda firsthand I now believe that the differences in the two parties could not be more clear and that for me to be true to my core beliefs and values I must align myself with the Republican party and speak out clearly on these issues.”

For Republicans, Griffith’s announcement was the culmination of a months-long, behind-the-scenes courtship effort. GOP sources said Griffith reached out to House Minority Leader John Boehner and met with NRCC Chairman Pete Sessions after first approaching an Alabama delegation colleague, GOP Rep. Jo Bonner. On Sunday, Griffith notified Boehner that he was prepared to make the switch official. GOP sources insisted that no deal was struck between Griffith and the House Republican leadership over his move.

Democratic aides said Griffith had actually approached House leaders after the August recess—a time in which he faced raucous town halls—to discuss a party switch. But aides said today’s announcement caught them off guard, and that Griffith gave them no indication that he was planning to bolt.

Democrats said in hindsight Griffith telegraphed his intentions in August when he told a local newspaper that he wouldn’t vote for Pelosi as Speaker again because she was too divisive.

“For people who have been working with his office and watching him, it wasn’t a big surprise,” remarked one senior Democratic leadership aide. “You connect the dots and it’s not a big surprise.”

Still, on the eve of an historic congressional health care vote, the announcement was an unwelcome reminder of the resistance to the measure—Griffith referred to it in his statement as “a major threat to our nation”—and of the increasingly stormy midterm election environment.

“Just about every signal we’ve had so far indicates that 2010 is going to be a tough year for Democrats, and this is another flashing red light,” said Larry Sabato, a University of Virginia political scientist. “The Democrats telling us Griffith’s switch doesn’t matter remind me of the Republicans who insisted that Arlen Specter’s party flip made no real difference. No, these things matter considerably, and they are indicators of which way the wind is blowing in a political season.”


Sources: Politico

Parker Griffith Blames Pelosi's Leadership For Switch To GOP

House Democrat Blames Pelosi, Leaders For Switch


Democratic Rep. Parker Griffith announced Tuesday that he's switching parties – saying he can no longer align himself “with a party that continues to pursue legislation that is bad for our country, hurts our economy and drives us further and further into debt.”

“Unfortunately there are those in the Democratic Leadership that continue to push an agenda focused on massive new spending, tax increases, bailouts and a health care bill that is bad for our healthcare system,” Griffith said in a statement. “I have always considered myself to be an independent voice and I have tried to be that voice in Congress – but after watching this agenda firsthand I now believe that the differences in the two parties could not be more clear and that for me to be true to my core beliefs and values I must align myself with the Republican party and speak out clearly on these issues.

Griffith’s party switch comes on the eve of a pivotal congressional health care vote and will send a jolt through a Democratic House Caucus that has already been unnerved by the recent retirements of a handful of members who, like Griffith, hail from districts that offer prime pickup opportunities for the GOP in 2010.

The switch represents a coup for the House Republican leadership, which had been courting Griffith since he publicly criticized the Democratic leadership in the wake of raucous town halls during the summer.

Virginia Rep. Eric Cantor, the No. 2 Republican in the House, hailed Griffith's move from a large majority to a small minority as proof that the Democrats have become “completely disconnected from seniors, young workers and and families in America.”

Liberals countered that Griffith was essentially a Republican all along, and Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), the chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said he should give back the money Democrats have contributed to his campaign.

"House Democratic members and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee took Parker Griffith at his word and, as a result, invested a great deal in working with Alabamans to bring Mr. Griffith to Congress," he said in a statement. "Mr. Griffith, failing to honor our commitment to him, has a duty and responsibility to return to Democratic Members and the DCCC the financial resources that were invested in him. His constituents will hold him accountable for failing to keep his commitments."

Griffith, who captured his seat in a close 2008 open seat contest, will become the first Republican to hold the historically Democratic, Huntsville-based district. A radiation oncologist who founded a cancer treatment center, Griffith cited the Democratic health care bill as a major reason for his switch.

“I want to make it perfectly clear that his bill is bad for our doctors, our patients and will have unintended consequences far beyond what we know today,” he said. “As a doctor and as a Republican, I plan to once again oppose this measure and hope that we can defeat this bill that is a major threat to our nation.”

While the timing of his announcement was unexpected, Griffith’s party switch will not come as a surprise to those familiar with his voting record, which is one of the most conservative among Democrats. "He has bucked the Democratic leadership on nearly all of its major domestic initiatives, including the stimulus package, health care legislation, the cap-and trade energy bill and financial regulatory reform. "He was one of only 11 House Democrats to vote against the stimulus.

“Look at his voting record – he’s had substantial differences philosophically with the Democratic agenda here in Congress,” said an Alabama ally who is familiar with Griffith’s decision. “It’s something that’s been discussed for the last several months… talking to people in his family. And it genuinely is a reflection of where he feels. It’s his own personal conviction.”

The Obama administration’s decision to scrap plans to build a missile defense shield in Eastern Europe further frustrated Griffith, according to GOP sources, because his district contains the base for Boeing’s ground-based missile defense research.

Ironically, a National Republican Congressional Committee spokesman called Griffith a “woefully ineffective advocate for Tennessee Valley jobs” after the decision was announced in September.

Signs of Griffith’s dissatisfaction with his party began to surface publicly during the summer recess, when he received an earful of criticism from constituents.

In August — one month after Republicans picked up his former state legislative seat in a special election — Griffith told a local newspaper that he wouldn't vote for Nancy Pelosi to remain as House Speaker because she's too divisive. He joked that if she didn’t like it, he’d provide her with a gift certificate to a mental health center.

He added that if the Democratic leadership wouldn't commit to working in a more bipartisan manner, "perhaps we should look at altering that."

Later that month, he was booed at a town hall forum, even though he said he was against his leadership’s version of health care reform.

“If I'm agreeing with you, don't fight me," Griffith said to a heckler, according to the Huntsville Times. "I'm on your team."

After the November off-year elections, he told POLITICO that he wanted to be called an independent Blue Dog and not a Democrat. He said the point of the elections was clear: “I should be nervous.”

Democratic pollster John Anzalone, an Alabama native, said that Griffith would have faced a difficult re-election, and undoubtedly was worried about his prospects in a conservative district.

“This is never a pleasant thing… you never can really figure out the motivation. Usually, it’s political opportunism. Parker Griffith can win as a Democrat, but it’s easier to win as a Republican,” said Anzalone. “When you run as a Southern Democrat, you run because you have a certain principle of being with the party of the people. You know what you’re getting into, there’s no surprise on the legislative side. It’s a political calculation.”

Several Republicans have already stepped forward to challenge Griffith, and it’s not clear whether they’ll drop their bids in light of his party switch. Madison County Commissioner Mo Brooks has already raised more than $100,000 for the campaign, while Navy veteran Les Phillip also is running.

Brooks's campaign manager, Bruce Tucker, told POLITICO he would remain in the race and called Griffith's move “a desperate political move.”

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee will now have to scramble to find a candidate to run against Griffith before Alabama’s April 2 filing deadline.

Though it has never elected a Republican to Congress, Griffith’s seat has a long conservative tradition and has backed Democrats who have a brand independent from the national party. As a result of the district’s Democratic heritage, Democrats still hold the majority of state legislative seats within the 5th Congressional District’s boundaries.

The district, however, is trending Republican: A wave of new residents is moving into the Huntsville suburbs, where the area’s burgeoning aerospace and defense industries have created a miniboom. And those voters, with fewer ties to the area’s past politics, have been reliably Republican at the national level.

The district gave John McCain a resounding 61 percent of the vote last year — a tick above the 60 percent President George W. Bush won in 2004.

Even so, last year Griffith managed a narrow win against the strong drag at the top of the ticket in one of the nastiest House races in the nation. He defeated Republican Wayne Parker 51 percent to 48 percent, despite heavy GOP spending against him.

The National Republican Congressional Committee poured in $514,000 to air ads attacking Griffith, including one that suggested he was soft on Islamic terrorism.

And the committee raised questions about whether Griffith engaged in medical malpractice when it released decades-old documentation accusing his cancer center of underdosing patients with radiation so that he could collect more money.

Griffith is the first House Democrat to switch parties since Rep. Rodney Alexander (R-La.) changed parties in 2004. The most recent member of Congress to switch parties is Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.), who announced his decision in April.

Griffith’s predecessor, former nine-term Rep. Bud Cramer, had been frequently mentioned as a possible party-switcher — and also as a possible appointee in the Bush administration — but he retired from Congress as a Democrat.

Griffith now has $619,000 in the bank to run as a Republican, a total boosted by contributions from several of the Democratic Party’s more liberal leaders. The political action committee of House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer donated $10,000 to Griffith’s reelection this year, and even Pelosi chipped in $4,000 — prior to Griffith's August remarks.





Republicans Embrace Parker Griffith


Republicans who desperately wanted to beat Alabama Democratic Rep. Parker Griffith next year are loving him today.

House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) touted Griffith as a “dedicated public servant who has consistently put the best interests of his constituents first.” Pete Sessions, chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, said Griffith is putting the “interests of his constituents ahead of Nancy Pelosi’s reckless ideological agenda.” Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.) says Griffith is ready to “stand and fight” with his new party.

Even the top Senate Republican felt compelled to tout Griffith as a sign of things to come, saying the defection represents “growing evidence of the unacceptability of this national Democratic agenda in much of red state America.” But Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, who told reporters Tuesday he grew up in Griffith’s district, said the divide is wider than just traditionally Republican enclaves.

“As you’ve seen the public opinion polls on health care bill, it’s not just red-state America where the health care bill is unpopular; it's in blue-state America as well,” McConnell said.

Boehner had been in talks with Griffith about switching parties, and today the Alabama lawmaker became the 178th Republican in the House.

“House Republicans will continue to offer the American people better solutions to address their everyday challenges, an effort that will surely benefit from Congressman Griffith’s leadership,” Boehner said in a press release.

House Republican Conference Chairman Mike Pence (R-Ind.) said the “historic decision should send a deafening message that the Obama-Pelosi agenda of borrowing, spending, bailouts and takeovers is being rejected by the American people.”



View Larger Map


Sources: Politico, Google Maps

Parker Griffith Switches To GOP Ranks!...Decision 2010

Rep. Parker Griffith switches To GOP



POLITICO has learned that Rep. Parker Griffith, a freshman Democrat from Alabama, will announce today that he’s switching parties to become a Republican.

According to a senior GOP aide familiar with the decision, the announcement will take place in this afternoon in his home district in northern Alabama.

Griffith’s party switch comes on the eve of a pivotal congressional health care vote and will send a jolt through a Democratic House Caucus that has already been unnerved by the recent retirements of a handful of members who, like Griffith, hail from districts that offer prime pickup opportunities for the GOP in 2010.

The switch represents a coup for House Republican leadership, which had been courting Griffith since he publicly criticized Democratic leadership in the wake of raucous town halls over the summer.

Griffith, who captured the seat in a close 2008 open seat contest, will become the first Republican to hold the historically Democratic, Huntsville-based district. A radiation oncologist who founded a cancer treatment center, Griffith plans to blast the Democratic health care bill as a prime reason for his decision to switch parties—and is expected to cite his medical background as his authority on the subject.

While the timing of his announcement was unexpected, Griffith’s party switch will not come as a surprise to those familiar with his voting record, which is one of the most conservative among all Democrats.

He has bucked Democratic leadership on nearly all of its major domestic initiatives, including the stimulus package, health care legislation, the cap-and trade energy bill and financial regulatory reform.

He was one of only 11 House Democrats to vote against the stimulus.

The Obama administration’s decision to scrap plans to build a missile defense shield in Eastern Europe further frustrated Griffith, according to GOP sources, since his home district contains the base for Boeing’s ground-based missile defense research.

Ironically, a National Republican Congressional Committee spokesman called Griffith a “woefully ineffective advocate for Tennessee Valley jobs” after the decision was announced in September.

Signs of Griffith’s dissatisfaction with his party began to surface publicly during the summer recess, when he received an earful of criticism from constituents.

In August—one month after Republicans picked up his former state legislative seat in a special election—he told a local newspaper that he wouldn't vote for Nancy Pelosi to remain as House Speaker because she's too divisive. He joked that if she didn’t like it, he’d provide her with a gift certificate to a mental health center.

He added that if the Democratic leadership wouldn't commit to working in a more bi-partisan manner, "perhaps we should look at altering that."

Later that month, he was booed at a town hall forum even though he said he was against his leadership’s version of health care reform.

“If I'm agreeing with you, don't fight me," Griffith said to a heckler, according to the Huntsville Times. "I'm on your team."

After the November off-year elections, he told POLITICO that he wanted to be called an independent Blue Dog and not a Democrat. He said the point of the elections was clear: “I should be nervous.”

Several Republicans had already stepped forward to challenge Griffith, and it’s not clear if they’ll drop their bids in light of his party-switch. Madison County Commissioner Mo Brooks has already raised over $100,000 for the campaign, while Navy veteran Les Phillip also was running.

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee will now have to scramble to find a candidate to run against Griffith before Alabama’s April 2 filing deadline.

Though it has never elected a Republican to Congress, Griffith’s seat has a long conservative tradition but has backed Democrats who have a brand independent from the national party. As a result of the district’s ancestral Democratic heritage, Democrats still hold the majority of state legislative seats within the 5th District’s boundaries.

The district, however, is trending Republican: A wave of new residents are moving into the Huntsville suburbs, where the area’s burgeoning aerospace and defense industries have created a mini-boom. And those voters, with fewer ties to the area’s past politics, have been reliable Republican at the national level.

The district gave John McCain a resounding 61 percent of the vote last year—a tick above the 60 percent former President George W. Bush won in 2004.

Even so, last year Griffith managed a narrow win against the strong drag at the top of the ticket in one of the nastiest House races in the nation. He defeated Republican Wayne Parker 51-48 percent, despite heavy GOP spending against him.

The National Republican Congressional Committee poured in $514,000 to air ads attacking Griffith, including one that suggested he was soft on Islamic terrorism.

And the committee raised questions about whether Griffith engaged in medical malpractice by releasing decades-old documentation accusing his cancer center of under-dosing patients with radiation so he could collect more money.

Griffith is the first House Democrat to switch parties since Rep. Rodney Alexander (R-La.) changed parties in 2004. The most recent member of Congress to switch parties is Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.), who announced his decision in April.

Griffith’s predecessor, former nine-term Rep. Bud Cramer, had been frequently mentioned as a possible party-switcher—and also as a possible appointee in the Bush administration—but he retired from Congress as a Democrat.

Griffith now has $619,000 in the bank to run as a Republican, a total boosted by contributions from several of the party’s more-liberal leaders. The political action committee of House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer donated $10,000 to Griffith’s reelection this year, and even Pelosi chipped in $4,000—prior to his August remarks.



View Larger Map


Sources: Politico, Google Maps