Senate 2020

Supreme Court Politics and the 2018 Election Map

Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy’s decision to retire four months before the election is the best thing that could have happened to Republicans, conventional wisdom says. It is difficult to disagree with that logic, but it is also necessary to keep in mind the counterargument – which is that enthusiasm cuts both ways. (To be fair, the more adequate word for Democrats still reeling from the announcement isn’t enthusiasm, but fear.)

Historically, Republican voters have been more motivated to go to the polls because of the issue of judicial nominations than Democrats. Exit polls from the 2016 election confirm this view. According to CNN, 56 percent of Trump voters said Supreme Court appointments were the most important factor in their decision. Evidence strongly suggests that filling Supreme Court vacancies was a big reason for Donald Trump’s win. Though the stakes for filling any court vacancy are always high, they aren’t as high or urgent from the Republican perspective this time around. Why? Two years ago, the presidency was up for grabs and, with it, the next two or more court vacancies, including the seat held by Scalia which could have altered the court’s majority if Hillary Clinton had won. Now, Donald Trump is in the middle of his first term, with a Republican-controlled Senate. It may gin up enthusiasm among some Republican voters, but it doesn’t have the same existential sense of urgency that Democrats are now feeling.

“Misery motivates, not utopia,” Karl Marx once wrote. That principle, combined with lingering anger over the Senate Republican blockade of Merrick Garland and the recent string of losses in Supreme Court decisions during the week leading up to the Kennedy retirement, strongly suggest that Democratic candidates and their allies aren’t going to treat this Supreme Court vacancy like any other opening in the past.

State Democratic parties and candidates are fundraising off the Kennedy retirement, some on the specific message of running as a defender of abortion rights. Others have spoken more generally about the urgency of electing Democratic governors and legislators to have as a check on any sweeping future rulings from the Supreme Court on issues like abortion, voting rights, gun control, campaign finance, or redistricting. However, the initial messaging from Democrats and various interest groups on the actual Supreme Court vacancy itself is all over the map, depending on who you ask. Their options to block a nominee are nonexistent after Senate Republicans abolished the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees for the Neil Gorsuch vote. Their only chance at blocking a nominee is the slim chance that minority leader Charles Schumer can hold all 49 Democrats and is somehow able to get two Republicans to join them in voting against.

Just as there will be enormous pressure on a handful of red state Democrats who are running for reelection this cycle (specifically Heidi Heitkamp, Joe Manchin and Joe Donnelly, who voted to confirm Neil Gorsuch last year), there will also be enormous pressure on Senators Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski, who are the only pro-choice Republicans in their party’s Senate caucus. Collins and Murkowski have the benefit of not running for reelection in this hyperpartisan political environment, but that doesn’t mean they won’t be feeling pressure. As Republican pro-choice women in the Senate who have a vote in judicial nominations, do they want their legacies to be defined by potentially casting the deciding vote to seat a Supreme Court justice who might one day vote to overturn Roe v. Wade?

It is also necessary to look beyond Murkowski and Collins for potential pressure points. Even though they aren’t on the ballot this year, the governors of Alaska and Maine are, as is Maine’s independent senator Angus King, who caucuses with the Democrats. Voters in both states won’t be able to vote against Murkowski or Collins in this cycle, so they may opt to flex their political muscles by voting for (or against) the candidates who are on the ballot in November.

While Senate Democrats have a terrible electoral map to defend this year, when it comes to governors and state legislatures, the map becomes almost the inverse, meaning that they will have ample pickup opportunities in down ballot races. Democrats have shown more interest and energy in down ballot state legislative races in the first eighteen months of the Trump presidency, and have already demonstrated some success in special elections – the DLCC has flipped 44 Republican-held seats to the Democrats, in addition to a Wisconsin state supreme court seat, a U.S. Senate seat in Alabama, and stunning off-year results up and down the ballot in Virginia. If Democrats can harness this anxiety about the court and turn it into votes in November, that could drive them to some surprise victories.

Democrats might not be able to stop Donald Trump’s next Supreme Court nominee, but they can put themselves in a better political position for the second half of his term: retaking the House or Senate will give them subpoena power and the ability to launch investigations, as well as control of nominations to the upper chamber; control of governor’s mansions, state offices and state legislatures will give them control of state voting rights as well as drawing the congressional maps for the next round of redistricting after 2020.

As painful as losing cases at the Supreme Court will be, the Democrats’ best hope for now is that they can use the court as an issue to play the long game: rebuild their bench in state and federal offices, gain congressional majorities, and eventually win the presidency.

Alabama House Member Considering Run Against Senator Doug Jones in 2020

Rep. Bradley Byrne (R-Ala.) told The Hill he was considering a run against Democratic Senator Doug Jones, who is up for re-election in 2020. He rated his chances of getting in the race as “greater than 50 percent.”

Jones won what was considered a safe Republican seat in a special election last December, defeating former Chief Justice Roy Moore who was politically weakened after a series of allegations that he made advances on teenage girls as a 30-year-old man. He is currently serving the remainder of former senator Jeff Sessions’ six-year term, which expires in 2020. He would likely be one of the most endangered Senate Democrats in that cycle.

DNC Sets Dates for 2020 Convention

The Democratic National Committee has scheduled its next national convention for the week of July 13, 2020. According to a statement, the convention is scheduled to begin eleven days before the star of the Summer Olympics to allow the party’s presidential nominee “maximum exposure heading into the fall.” The earlier date also gives the nominee earlier access to general election funds, which are restricted until after the candidate has formally accepted the party’s nomination. Because Republicans control the White House, the Democrats will hold their convention first. According to the Washington Post, the 2020 convention will be the earliest since 1976.

According to CNN, the committee has narrowed down its choice of host city for the convention to eight possible contenders:

Atlanta, Georgia
Birmingham, Alabama
Denver, Colorado
Houston, Texas
Miami Beach, Florida
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
New York, New York
San Francisco, California

Each city has its pros and cons. With the exceptions of Birmingham and Milwaukee, all have hosted previous Democratic conventions.

Atlanta: It is one of the most Democratic cities in the south, in a state Democrats have wanted to flip for years that Hillary Clinton lost by five points. If gubernatorial nominee Stacey Abrams wins the governor’s race in the fall, she will be a rising star in the party and be able to make a strong case for Atlanta as the convention’s host city. She would probably be a contender to deliver the keynote address, which historically has been a springboard for future stars of the party. Having the convention here would also be a boon to the Democratic nominee running against incumbent Republican senator David Perdue. Picking Atlanta would also reaffirm Democratic commitment to trying to compete and win in the south, an area that geographically has trended Republican for years.
Birmingham: Incumbent senator Doug Jones, who won an upset victory in the Alabama Senate race last year and would be running for reelection, would at the very least be considered for a prime-time speaking slot, if not the keynote address. His reelection campaign and the state Democratic party would likely benefit a great deal from having the convention in Alabama. Like Atlanta, choosing Birmingham for the convention would be a reaffirmation of Democratic intentions to compete in the south. However, the state is still solidly Republican.
Denver: The Mile High City hosted Barack Obama’s first convention in 2008, and the state has voted Democratic in the last three presidential elections. Hosting the convention could be a boon to the Democratic challenger running against incumbent Republican senator Cory Gardner. Democrats have found success in the Mountain West in recent years, particularly Colorado and New Mexico. Democratic candidates in purplish states like Arizona or Montana could benefit from having the convention in Denver.
Houston: Democrats have dreamed of turning Texas blue for years, a state dominated by Republicans up and down the ticket since the mid-1990s. Hillary Clinton had the best performance of a Democratic presidential candidate in two decades, losing by nine points. Beto O’Rourke is seen as a long-shot candidate to beat incumbent Senator Ted Cruz this November, though the state’s growing minority population could help Democratic candidates running for the House of Representatives this year. Texas won’t be voting for a Democratic presidential candidate any time soon, but hosting the convention in Houston would be an affirmation of the party’s commitment to making that a reality.
Miami Beach: Hosting a convention in the perennial and all-important swing state of Florida is never a bad idea for either party. If all the Trump-Nixon comparisons weren’t enough already, here’s another one: the last time the Democrats held their convention in Miami Beach was in 1972 – a few weeks after the Watergate burglary.
Milwaukee: Wisconsin has had one of the most successful Republican state parties in the country in recent years, thanks arguably to Governor Scott Walker. Having the Democratic convention in Milwaukee would be a form of making amends, both to rebuild the state party and to not repeat Hillary Clinton’s disastrous failure to campaign in the Badger State in 2016.
New York: The Big Apple has all the existing infrastructure to host a convention, and has done so for both parties many times over the years. It would be geographically convenient for many of the party’s fundraisers, as well as Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer. The city also appeals to the party’s young, minority, and LGBT base. It would also let Democrats take the fight directly to Donald Trump in his hometown, although Trump lost the city and the state handily in 2016. Besides practicality, there is little advantage to doing it here.
San Francisco: Like New York, it has all the existing infrastructure and has hosted previous conventions. It would be geographically convenient for many of the party’s fundraisers, as well as House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi. The city also appeals to the party’s young, minority, and LGBT base. The city and state are solidly Democratic. Again, like New York, San Francisco offers little more than practicality.

UPDATE: According to Politico Playbook, the DNC has narrowed the field down to four finalists: Denver, Houston, Miami Beach and Milwaukee.

UPDATE II: The Denver Post is reporting that the Denver bid has been withdrawn, citing incompatibility with the planned July 2020 dates for the convention. Houston, Miami Beach and Milwaukee remain on the shortlist.

Democratic Governors Want Next DNC Chair to Commit to Investing in State Races

The Democratic Governors Association released an open letter to the candidates running for chairman of the Democratic National Committee listing the five criteria the DGA will use to evaluate candidates. From the letter:

1) Real, measurable commitment to investing resources in winning gubernatorial and state legislative races in 2018 and 2020, years that will decide the fate of redistricting;

2) A commitment to investing in organizing in states with competitive gubernatorial and legislative races — not just in states with competitive presidential or congressional elections;

3) A commitment from the candidate to serving full time as chair;

4) Commitment to provide resources to state parties for organizing and communications staff; to provide technical assistance for redistricting; provide training and support to recruit and support next generation of Democratic leaders;

5) A commitment to working with Democratic governors and other state policy leaders on advancing policies that grow our economy and strengthen the middle class.

The first two points are especially critical for the party’s short and long-term rebuilding plans. First, congressional redistricting is four years away, and in order to redraw more favorable maps, Democrats need to control governorships and state legislatures. (South Carolina Democratic Party chairman Jaime Harrison noted at the forum organized by the Ohio Democratic Party last week: “33 out of 50 governorships are controlled by Republicans, 69 out of 99 state houses are controlled by Republicans, but we only obsess about the White House.”) The fact that the Democrats’ 2017-2018 calendar is much better at the state level than at the congressional level gives this even greater urgency.

The second reason is that they need to rebuild their bench in a hurry so that a new post-Obama, post-Clinton generation of leaders can make their way up the ranks. Remember, Barack Obama was in the Illinois state senate for seven years before he was elected to the U.S. Senate, which became his springboard to the presidency four short years later.

Democratic Senator Won’t Run In New Mexico Gubernatorial Race

According to the New Mexico Political Report, Senator Tom Udall will not run for governor in 2018:

“While I firmly believe that I have the backing and the experience to properly address all these issues, I have determined, after consulting with my family, colleagues and constituents, that New Mexico will be better served by my remaining in the United States Senate,” Udall said.

In his statement, Udall outlined the problems he sees in the state, including falling “behind in education and jobs” and failing “to take full advantage of our abundant natural resources and our potential for developing a renewable energy industry.”

The incumbent Republican governor Susana Martinez is term-limited, meaning that New Mexico will have an open governor’s race in both parties. On the Democratic side, the New Mexico Political Report mentions Rep. Michelle Lujan Grisham, Attorney General Hector Balderas, Santa Fe Mayor Javier Gonzales, former magazine co-founder Alan Webber and former Univision executive Jeff Apodaca as possible candidates. For the Republicans, Lieutenant Governor John Sanchez, Rep. Steve Pearce and Albuquerque Mayor Richard Berry are mentioned.

Udall is up for re-election in the Senate in 2020.

Mark Warner Won’t Run for President in 2020

Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) told the Wall Street Journal that he would not be running for president in four years, despite the fact that he flirted with a possible run back in 2008. “I think that window is probably shut,” he told a group of WSJ reporters and editors. He also said he would look for areas and issues where he could cooperate with Republicans and the Trump administration. Warner is up for re-election to the Senate in 2020.