More news emanating from our new Congressional maps: Congressman Charlie Gonzalez announced today that he is retiring, and will not seek re-election to the 20th district. Now, former Congressman Ciro Rodriguez and State Representative Joaquin Castro are shuffling their intended seats to try and capitalize on the opportunity. From the San Antonio Express-News:
Rep. Charlie Gonzalez said Friday he will not seek re-election, a decision that will end the congressional tenure of a Democratic family whose name has been synonymous with the city of San Antonio for more than half a century. ...
It also presents a political opportunity to state Rep. Joaquín Castro, twin brother of San Antonio Mayor Julián Castro. The Democrat likely will seek Gonzalez's 20th Congressional District seat, his spokesman Cary Clack said.
Former U.S. Rep. Ciro Rodriguez, another Democrat, is eyeing the newly redrawn 35th district in which Castro originally intended to run.
"It's about having lived in this district almost my entire life," said Rodriguez, who previously served in the 28th district before being ousted by Rep. Henry Bonilla, D-Laredo, and in the 23rd district before losing to Rep. Quico Canseco, R-San Antonio.
Previously, Rodriguez had announced his intentions to contest the 23rd district, which he lost to Quico "I Vote Against Cops and Firefighters" Canseco in 2010. State Representative Pete Gallego had also announced intentions to run for the seat.
Let's look at the districts and the share of the vote each gave Barack Obama and Bill White, as well as the share of Spanish-surname voter registration:
Castro, in moving from the new 35th to the 20th, will now be running in a district that is more comfortably Democratic in both Presidential and Gubernatorial cycles. Ciro moves from a tough primary and tough general election battle to what is likely to be at least an easier November match-up and easier hold in non-Presidential cycles. This was a smart move for Ciro, who will no longer face a primary against State Representative Pete Gallego, who has represented much of the turf that makes up CD-23 in the Legislature as the 74th district for the past 20 years.
Gallego, who has already started fundraising for the 23rd, will face a general election opponent in Canseco. Arguably if Gallego can avoid a tough primary battle for what is still a swing district, that helps Democrats conserve resources and win even more seats next November.
Both the 20th and 35th should be solid Democratic seats. So it remains to be seen if either Castro or Rodriguez will draw a primary challenger. Any rumors?
Meanwhile, a special note of thanks to Congressman Gonzalez for his long service to San Antonio, following in the footsteps of his father, Congressman Henry B. Gonzalez. He also currently chairs the Congressional Hispanic Caucus. It is exciting to see a new generation of leaders running for these seats, but it's also sad, in a way, to lose so much seniority and institutional memory. Best of luck to Gonzalez as he looks towards his future!
Congressman Canseco claims that President Obama isn't funding relief for the Texas wildfires. (Source). This is a lie.
FEMA has issued 26 grants to pay for the fire, which covers 75% of the cost - the same rate Texas would have received from Perry's request. (Source)
Canseco voted against increased funding for firefighters and first responders. (Source.)
Congressman Quico Canseco - like Governor Rick Perry - has begun to falsely attacked President Barack Obama about funding to fight the disastrous Texas wildfires. As the San Antonio Express-News reported today (which came 16 days after the Christian Science Monitor first reported it), FEMA has provided 75% of all funding that has been used to fight Texas wildfires:
It is an impression contradicted by officials at the Federal Emergency Management Agency, who awarded Texas its 26th grant Sunday to help cover the cost of firefighting efforts.
"This administration, through FEMA, has been working closely with the state throughout the duration of these fires, and we are supporting the firefighting efforts," FEMA spokeswoman Rachel Racusen said.
Those 26 grants will reimburse 75 percent of the costs related to fighting designated fires throughout the state - the same reimbursement rate the state would have received if Perry's request for major disaster status had been accepted.
The facts couldn't be more clear. But that doesn't stop the intellectually bereft* Congressman Quico Canseco from following the dishonorable lead of Governor Rick Perry and trying to blame the President for not fully funding the fires. Canseco has released a fraudulent YouTube video, blaming President Obama for not funding the fire.
Canseco's lies are disturbing, but not nearly as disturbing as the fact that he has the temerity** to lie about the President's lack of funding when Congressman Quico Canseco voted against funding firefighter and first responder assistance earlier this year.
In 2011, Canseco voted against increasing funding for FEMA firefighter assistance grants by $510 million. The new total funding would have given $390 million for firefighter assistance grants and $420 million for Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER) grants. In fact, Canseco was one of only 113 of the 435 Members of Congress to vote against funding for firefighters and first responders. (Roll Call Vote #60).
Like Republicans in Texas -- who, in the Texas Legislature, voted to cut funds for volunteer fighters by 75% earlier this year -- Congressman Canseco is making a losing argument to try and hide the fact that he voted against increased funding for firefighters and first responders. For the good of all of Texas, we need Texas Republicans -- from Canseco to Perry -- to stop lying about federal funding and start actually voting to help our state. Until he does, Congressman Canseco should at the very least keep his lying mouth shut.
-------------------
*The phrase "intellectually bereft" means "dumb." Since the Congressman seems to have trouble with the most basic of knowledge, I figured I should clarify it for him in case he happened to come across this post.
**Temerity = boldness.
It's terrifying to see how much money each member received from financial groups.
Eight of the twelve new members chosen to take seats on the House Financial Services Committee can count the finance, insurance and real estate sector as the top contributor to their election.
This has to make you ask the basic question, will the members of this important committee represent the people or the corporations who donated millions to get them elected.
As the non-partisan Sunlight foundation states, Quico Canseco won by a small margin in a Texas border district that narrowly went for Barack Obama in 2008. He received nearly 10% of his funds from the finance, insurance and real estate industry.
Canseco beat Democrat Ciro Rodriguez in the 23rd Congressional District last November with less than 50% of the vote. Depending on how lines are drawn, This district is at the top of our list to flip the seat back in 2012. Canseco has a fine line to walk. The freshman Republican will either have to kiss the ring of the donors who got him elected or represent the people of his district.
As we saw in 2005-2006, the bills that go through this important committee, hardly help both.
I was asked recently by some out of staters on what the Texas congressional delegation might look like after redistricting. There has been concern that with Republicans controlling the Governor's office, both legislative chambers, and all the members of the Legislative Redistricitng Board (not to mention adding 4 new seats) Democrats could face more losses.
While I won't put anything past the GOP in Texas when it comes to redistricting there are two factors that I believe will moderate the damage.
The first is that for the first time since the 60s, a Democratic led Justice Department will review our maps to ensure they meet the Voting Rights Act standards for African American and Hispanic seats.
The second is the Republican gains in 2010 of TX-17, TX-23, and TX-27.
As such, our delegation will now be a 23-9 GOP to Dem majority; that's before we talk about adding an expected 4 seats in redistricting. Even with our creative map-makers I don't see how you could draw all 4 new seats to be Republicans and try to create a 27-9 map that passes muster with the Justice Dept. Based upon population estimates, there is a general expectation that the new districts would probably end up with 1 each in Houston, Dallas/Fort Worth, somewhere around the I-35 corridor between DFW and Austin/San Antonio, and then one in South Texas.
DFW currently has ~7 Congressional seats and only 1 of those is a Democrat. I'm not sure how you add a seat there and not force a 2nd Democratic seat to come into existence when you consider the Democratic shift in Dallas. I'm also not sure how you create another seat in South Texas and protect both TX-23 and TX-27. I don't see how you can create 3 Republican districts along the border. Something has to give.
In Central Texas, I would guess they may just draw Lloyd Doggett back into Austin and pack his Democratic seat again in order to create an I-35 seat that's more safely Republican. As far as Houston, there's just so many people that you can probably create whatever you want, but you have to start with the Voting Rights Act districts and work out from there.
If we had the same map in 2 years that we do now (as if there was no redistricting), I would say we'd probably pick back up TX-27 and then TX-23 for a 21-11 map. That's the natural balance of the currently drawn map under 'normal' conditions. If you have to draw in 4 more seats, Democrats would have to get 1 of them and it's possible that we could get 2 if the GOP ends up having to try to protect their pickups this year. That's the silver lining of course, in that Democratic losses in 2010 leave very few takeover targets for the GOP while adding 3 more Republican incumbents who will want to be protected.
So all things considered, I think both the Dems and the GOP will add 2 raw seats to their delegations with Dems having a chance at picking up another 2 by defeating currently held Republican seats. It could also be a total wash in the case the GOP loses TX-23 and TX-27 but instead wins 3 of the 4 newly created districts meaning both sides pick up 3 seats for a net change of zero.
Another challenge will be the GOP's 2 new Hispanic Congressman. Canesco in TX-23 (Ciro's seat) will have to be defeated in a General Election, it's hard to make his seat more Republican without making it less Hispanic so the VRA will probably keep him competitive. Bill Flores in a new TX-17 (Chet's) could be vulnerable to a Anglo primary challenger given the Republican party's recent history with defeating sitting Hispanic Republicans (see: Victor Carrillo). I'm not exactly sure what happens with Blake Farenthold in TX-27 which is a Hispanic district now with an Anglo Republican Congressman. Though to be fair, Anglo Democrat Gene Green represents a African American Hispanic district in Houston and has for years.
With 24 million people, 36 districts, and Republicans drawing the maps, anything is certainly possible, but there is not much more damage to be done to the Democratic delegation at this point in Texas and entirely possible that it will be at worst a wash with the chance to even gain a net seat or two in 2012.
While the Republican Party of Texas is busy trying to illegally fund the Green Party's ballot access in Texas to make sure that Green candidates make it on the ballot in competitive districts like TX-23, they might want to start worrying about their GOP nominees.
Francisco "Quico" Canseco, the Republican nominee against incumbent Democrat Ciro Rodriguez has reportedly had hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of federal, state, and mechanics liens levied against him in the last three decades. The irony is that in the 2008 primary, Canseco made a huge stink about a $950 property tax debt cleared decades ago by his opponent, former Bexar County Commissioner Lyle Larson.
While I've never been of the opinion that Ciro was in trouble of losing his seat this fall, I'm not sure the voters of TX-23 will be interested in tossing him out of office for a hypocrite like Canesco.
Americans United for Change launched a new television ad campaign in Texas today applauding U.S. Rep. Ciro Rodriguez (TX-23) for standing up to the big health insurance industry and helping pass the Affordable Health Care for America Act on behalf of Texas families. The TV spot called "It's Time" is airing throughout the week on a mix of broadcast and cable TV in the San Antonio media market.
The 2010 Republican primary to determine who will face Democratic incumbent Ciro Rodriguez could look just as it did in 2008, when Bexar County Commissioner Lyle Larson, despite being heavily outspent, defeated lawyer and businessman Fransisco "Quico" Canseco.
Canseco has said he will definitely be a candidate and told the San Antonio Express-News that he has already had discussions with the National Republican Congressional Committee. Larson has not made a final decision and told the paper he would make an announcement later this year.
Due mostly to his ability to self-finance his campaign, Canseco has been encouraged to run by NRCC Chair Pete Sessions. Canseco spent $1 million in 2008 and was soundly defeated by Larson. If Canseco decides to run again, expect Sessions and other Republicans to lean on Larson to stay out of the race, given that he lost to Rodriguez by double digits in 2008.
It's official. I am tired of reading that Republicans have an advantage in low turnout or special elections.
The facts simply do not support the bold claim.
Since 2005, Democrats have won or over performed in nearly every special election in Texas.
The obvious and best example of this is House District 97. In the December, "low turnout" special election, Dan Barrett won. In the November general election, Dan Barrett lost. Barrett saw a 10 point erosion in his numbers while Shelton saw a nearly 8 point gain.
House District 97 Special Election Dan Barrett (D) - 52.18%
Mark M. Shelton (R) - 47.81%
House District 97 General Election Mark M. Shelton (R) - 55.33%
Dan Barrett (D) - 42.75%
Nothing changed. Barrett was out spent in both elections. Shelton was cozy to Craddick in both elections. The only major difference is the turnout numbers. Barrett won the low turnout election, Shelton won the high turnout election.
It may seem like an overstatement, but looking back to 2005 the Republican special election not only appears to be a fallacy, it appears to be nonexistent.
2006 was a very good year for Democrats who ran in supposedly Republican favored special elections.
U. S. Representative District 23 Henry Bonilla (R) - 45.71%
Ciro D. Rodriguez (D) - 54.28%
State Representative District 48 Ben Bentzin (R) - 42.38%
Donna Howard (D) - 57.61%
In 2006, Democrats won every special election they ran in with the exception of House District 29. House District 29 hasn't elected a Democrat since 2000 and no Democrat has received more than Tom Uher did in 2002 when he got 42.59% of the vote after 9/11. Before that, Uher represented a totally different district than what is now HD-29. Before the census and redistricting, Uher's district was a democratically favorable district, and since, it has been carved in a way to help elect over 100 Republicans in Texas (as was Tom DeLay's goal at the time).
You have to go back to February 2005 to see a special election contest where a Republican had a definitive win.
State Representative District 121 Paul Silbert (I) - 3.09%
Rose Spector (D) - 33.58%
Glen S. Starnes (R) - 1.38%
Joe Straus (R) - 61.93%
As Kuff wrote in 2005, House District 121 was and continues to be a Republican district. House District 121 in northeast San Antonio and stretched from Olmos Park northeast to Windcrest and north past Loop 1604.
Although Spector lost, she still did better than the Democratic challenger did against Elizabeth Ames Jones in 2000.
State Representative District 121 Elizabeth Ames Jones (R) - 68.24%
Michael G. Zapper (D) - 28.68%
J. (Jay) Moore (L) - 3.07%
While it didn't win us the seat, Democrats saw a nearly 5 point increase during the 2005 special election. In a competitive race, a 5 point swing would be the difference between victory and defeat.
In fact this phenomenon extends beyond urban districts. On February 17, 2004, Democrats were only 3.5 points away from winning the rural Senate District 1 in a special election.
State Senator, District 1 (Unexpired) Kevin Eltife (R) - 51.86%
Paul Sadler (D) - 48.13%
The truth is, Democrats do well in special elections. The reasons differ. The politics and finances differ from year to year and campaign to campaign, but the empirical data remains consistent.
As we move rapidly towards December 16, it is more important than ever for us to elect Congressman Chris Bell. The data shows it will only get harder.
(for more information about the Senate District 17 special election click here.)
Americans United for Change, a non-profit progressive issue-advocacy group that recently launched its Bush Legacy Project, today unveiled its latest TV ad series called 'Break' which recognizes U.S. Reps. Nick Lampson (TX-22) and Ciro Rodriguez (TX-23) for their work towards a stronger economy, especially their success in passing meaningful legislation to provide immediate tax relief for hard working Americans - $1,200 for most families - including vital relief for seniors, veterans and families with children.
In addition to Lampson and Rodriquez, AUFC also began airing ads recognizing Carol Shea-Porter (NH-1) and Kirsten Gillibrand (NY-20). All four ads are running on a mix of cable and broadcast in these Members' districts and will run through the rest of the week.
This is great news and really speaks to how important it was to win back TX-23 last year in the special rather than waiting around til 2008.
Rep. Ciro Rodriguez has nearly $600,000 available for his re-election campaign, almost twice as much as his nearest potential 2008 challenger, Federal Election Commission records show.
San Antonio lawyer Francisco "Quico" Canseco, a Republican, has $303,553 in cash-on-hand. He raised $78,000 during the three-month period ending Sept. 30 and loaned his campaign $140,000.
The campaign spent $350,000 on TV and radio advertising.
Jim McGrody, a businessman seeking the Republican nomination, raised $11,000 and ended the period with $5,500 in cash-on-hand.
One other interesting note from the SAEN story...
Canseco's decision to spend his personal funds have earned him support from Republicans in Washington, said David Wasserman, an analyst with the non-partisan Cook Political Report.
I wish the Republicans (as well as Democrats) would move past the idea that spending your own personal funds is the only way to be taken seriously by insiders in Washington. Self-funders track record isn't all that great. Here's what the Wall Street Journal pointed out about self-funding earlier this year.
Indeed, the majority of self-funded campaigns fail. The Center for Responsive Politics says only one of the 30 congressional candidates who spent at least $500,000 of their own money in 2004 got elected. (That one was Michael McCaul, a Texas Republican.)
Acording to Jennuifer Steen, a professor at Boston College who wrote a book on self-financed candidates for Congress, such candidates won only about 30 percent of their elections between 1990 and 2000.
Granted, Steen says that spending millions of your own money on a race can blunt the opposition. But for the most part, money doesn't guarantee victory. What matters more is the experience of a candidate and his or her appeal to voters. While money helps, it can't rescue a bad candidate.
Ciro may not have always had the best track record in raising money but he's been steadily building up his campaign coffers and should be well placed in 2008 as an incumbent.
Let's look at the districts and the share of the vote each gave Barack Obama and Bill White, as well as the share of Spanish-surname voter registration:
