As I noted in a post on Pete Session's lackluster NRCC efforts last Friday, many of our incumbent Texas Republican Congressmen are facing primary challengers this cycle, from Tea Party folks. Let's take some time to get to know the folks who are doing their best to make Congress even less functional, and think about what this means for the Republican party.
Ralph Hall vs. Jerry Ray (Tea) Hall, TX-4
Hall faces tea party challenger Jerry Ray Hall (no relation to Ralph or Mick Jagger's ex), who submitted his ballot application with the word "Tea" after his middle name. Challenger-Hall also has been passing around a photo of himself with Rep. John Culberson as an implied--and erroneous--endorsement. That link is also entertaining because "Jerry Ray (Tea) Hall" mixes it up in the comments... With himself.
Also interesting about this race: Congressman-Hall is the oldest member of the House, at 86 years. He would take over the Science Committee should the Republicans regain control of the lower chamber. Notably, would-be Science Chair Hall is actually older than the Big Bang Theory, the Heisenberg Uncertainty principle, penicillin, the material nylon, radiocarbon dating, treatment for leukemia, the radio transistor, and the polio vaccine. I'm not trying to imply anything... Well, really, I'm just saying, the dude is too old to be in charge of the Science Committee.
Michael McCaul vs. Joe Petronis, TX-10
Michael "#7 Water Waster in Austin" McCaul is facing a primary challenge from the self-proclaimed "RINO Hunter" Joe Petronis. In fact, he has an entire page on his website dedicated to his RINO Hunting. Click on the link. You need a giggle.
This is interesting, because unlike some of the districts mentioned here (the 4th, 11th) which are mind-numbingly Republican, the 10th (and Sessions' 32nd) have the potential to flip. Unfortunately, the highly-anticipated challenger to McCaul, Jack McDonald, did not file for the race, leaving 2006 challenger Ted Ankrum to pick up the slack. It will be interesting to see, however, what effect the primary challenge has on a Republican base that doesn't have too much to praise in the lackluster McCaul's performance in D.C. After all, McCaul is clearly better at wasting water at home than he is fighting for jobs or hewing to "conservative principles" in D.C.
Mike Conaway vs. Chris Younts, TX-11
Conaway, from Midland, is a big-time Bush crony, working for Bush's various failed business ventures until being appointed by then-governor Bush to the Texas State Board of Public Accountancy. He later had the luxury to run for a district again redrawn by DeLay to include Midland and Odessa. TX-11 is widely considered to be one of the most Republican, with a PVI of R+28. (Only the 13th, much of the Panhandle held by Mac Thornberry, is more Republican, at R+29.)
Conaway is being challenged by Chris Younts, an insurance salesman from San Angelo. Of his candidacy, Younts stated, "Contrary to opinions on both sides, the Tea Party movement was never intended to play the role of an infatuated, doting cheerleader of all players with an 'R' on their jersey, regardless of past indiscretions."
Kenny Marchant vs. Frank Roszell, TX-24
Marchant will face a primary challenge for the district he basically drew for himself during the 2003 Congressional gerrymander, during which time he was a member of the Texas House. He is squaring off against Roszell, a developer and tea party supporter from Grapevine. Roszell may win the "best quote on a campaign website" contest, which is pretty stiff amongst the Tea Partiers: "No one will jerk my chain but my wife." Unclear how his views on chain-jerking relate to partisan line-drawing.
Pete Sessions vs. David Smith, TX-32
As I noted last Friday, the head of the entire NRCC is facing a primary challenger in the form of David Smith, a corporate financial analyst and tea party activist determined to rid the Republicans of the D-minus Sessions.
Smith expects to receive significant grassroots support from the Tea Party denizens, telling TPM "I anticipate that those will be the most active supporters of my campaign, those are going to be the people who will go out for my campaign and wear out shoes, and make phone calls to people in the district."
This ought to be interesting. While pundits and political "soothsayers" are already predicting death to Democratic victories this cycle, there's clearly a fomenting Tea Party movement on the Right that sets the stage for post-primary strife, and may enable third party or independent candidates to step up to the plate and capitalize on this discontent.
Let's also not count out the role of Debra Medina in this, whose gubernatorial campaign may draw out Republican primary voters who seek to support the "Tea Party" challengers in their local Congressional primaries. However, the national Republicans seem largely unwilling to address the growing frustration amongst Tea Party activists, suggesting that everyone will mend fences after the primary and work for the status-quo Republican incumbents that are likely to survive the vast, vast majority of their primary challenges.
A New York Times piece on the recent Republican retreat to their favorite foreign nation of Hawaii illustrates this. Michael Steele, RNC chairman, stated:
"If a Republican incumbent or a Republican candidate is running and a Tea Party candidate is in the race and the Republican wins, my expectation is that the Tea Party guy is going to support the Republican. ... Because we would support the Tea Party guys."
Ok, let me get this straight: RNC Chair Michael Steele says that his party would support Tea Party activists should they win a primary. However, that's the exact opposite of what happened in NY-23, where moderate Republican Dede Scozzafava endorsed Democrat Bill Owens over certified nutjob Doug Owens after Tea Party folks pushed Scozzafava out of the race for being insufficiently ideologically pure. The comments of the challengers above suggest that this might not be so true, and that Tea Party activists may not let themselves be taken for granted by the Republican Party.
This should also be a huuuuge warning sign to moderate Republicans and independents, that the RNC establishment says publicly that they're willing to get on board with Tea Party extremists should they win the primary.
However, former Texas Congressmember and one-man Dick Armey seems to see the handwriting on the wall:
"This is not a situation where the grass-roots activists are saying, 'What can we do to make ourselves attractive to the Republicans?'" he said. "It is 'What can we do to help the Republicans understand what they must do to be attractive to us.'"
Armey admits it: the Tea Party is the new activist base of conservative politics. To win over their support and enthusiasm in November, Republican candidates may have to swing even harder to the right to pacify the folks who are currently holding the megaphone in the Republican party. What this will do to moderate and mainstream voters remains to be seen, but thanks to the Tea Party this may shape up to be a more intriguing election season than we expect.
Dallas-area Republican Congressman Pete Sessions continues to suck it up as head of the NRCC, turning in another lackluster fundraising quarter for the Republicans' Congressional campaign efforts. Even the pro-GOP Daily Caller failed to put a positive spin on the GOP's numbers:
The Republican fundraising arm for House races this year raised $3.2 million in December and paid off their debt, but still lags far behind their Democratic counterpart in cash on hand. The National Republican Congressional Committee, which released its numbers Friday morning, has $2.67 million in its war chest, compared to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee's $16.7 million. The DCCC outraised the the NRCC with a total of $3.8 in December.
Because Republican suckitude always looks better in a clear, comparative numerical array, here's a table:
Republicans
Democrats
Advantage
Raised in December
$3.2M
$3.8M
Democrats.
Current Cash On Hand
$2.67M
$16.7M
Democrats. By a factor of seven. Burn.
Total Raised in 2009
$35.8M
$55.7M
Democrats.
"Two million! That's right, we've only got two million in the bank! And there are 435 seats in Congress!"
When asked for a statement on the $2.67M cash on hand, Pete Sessions held his fingers up like Nixon and demonstrated to the illiterate tea-bagging base how many "two million" is. Despite recent success at recruiting candidates, it remains unclear whether the GOP infrastructure will be able to support them. The RNC only has $8.7M on hand. Furthermore, many incumbent Republicans are facing primary challengers from the agitated, further-right-wing Tea Party crowd. If you're that far to the right of the modern day Republicans, you may be at risk of falling off the edge of the flat earth you believe in. If the Republicans are the "Party of NO," what does that make their primary challengers? The "Party of Oh HELL NO," I suppose.
This is a particularly amusing turn of events here in Texas, where three of our Republican Congressmen are facing primary challenges: Reps. Ralph Hall, Kenny Marchant, and Mike Conaway all have primary opponents.
So, for that matter, does Pete Sessions himself, who will face a strong opponent in the general election in Grier Raggio, if he can first get past David Smith, a Dallas businessman active in the Tea Party. From Talking Points Memo:
Will he tap into the Tea Party movement, to power his campaign? "Absolutely, absolutely I will," said Smith, saying that the principles of the Tea Party movement are largely in line with his own. "I anticipate that those will be the most active supporters of my campaign, those are going to be the people who will go out for my campaign and wear out shoes, and make phone calls to people in the district."
Sessions, who somehow managed to convince the voters of CD-32 that he had any skills relevant to serving in Congress, now faces a far-right challenger in the form of a corporate financial analyst railing against the bailout. However, it does seem that Democrats and Tea Party Smith may have something to agree on:
Smith also warned the Republican Party about Sessions' performance as NRCC chairman, in the wake of NY-23: "If this is the performance we can expect from the NRCC nationwide, going into the primaries and general election next year, this is a D-minus -- and that's friendly."
We agree! Pete Sessions gets a D-minus for his performance as NRCC chair. I just hope he keeps it up. Or down, as the case may be.
First, TX-32, formerly held by Martin Frost (D) but lost to Pete Sessions (R) in Tom DeLay's mid-decade redistricting is listed as a Tier 2 "emerging race". Democrat Grier Raggio will be the Democratic nominee in a district that has been trending more Democratic over the past decade but still eluded Dallas County party activists cycle after cycle. Raggio is legitimate candidate and liked by locals so it's great to see the 32nd District make it on the DCCC's list.
The other notable district is TX-10 which is notable for its absence as a targeted race ever since Democrat Jack McDonald withdrew from running last month. Formerly a top target by the DCCC, it appears that Democrat Ted Ankrum will be carrying the party banner in the 10th District without much support from the national committee as expected.
While there are few competitive congressional races for either party thank to redistricting, having a couple dozen targeted GOP seats is a good sign in limiting the overall losses the party is expected have this November.
Despite repeated campaign promises to always be in the District on weekends, Pete Sessions is working overtime today to kill health care reform.
His latest outburst on the House floor drew "a burst of chatter" in the room, kind of like it does in bi-partisan settings here at home when Sessions gets stuck for an answer and says the first thing that comes to mind, usually a tangent about "socialism" or "Nancy Pelosi."
In his latest gaffe, Pete Sessions defended the insurance industry's practice of charging higher rates to women, comparing the practice to charging higher rates for smokers. Transcript over the jump...
(Really? Huh. - promoted by Karl-Thomas Musselman)
Pete Sessions was one of the first members of Congress to co-sponsor John Boehner's bill, H.R. 3571, to cut off Federal funding to "Any organization that has filed a fraudulent form with any Federal or State regulatory agency."
The bill was intended as a "de-fund ACORN" measure, but Democrats figured out right away that the broad wording of the bill could also cut funds to a long list of military contractors, effectively defunding the "military industrial complex."
Excuse me if I get a bit emotional, but I couldn't be more ashamed that Pete Sessions represents my congressional district (TX-32) than I am now.
It's bad enough that Sessions dishonestly claims that healthcare reform has been rejected by the American people when in fact poll after poll shows the completely opposite conclusion. It's also bad enough that Sessions has opposed anything that represents real progressive change in this country, including the Employee Free Choice Act.
Now Sessions has, in effect, allied with those who have toted guns during presidential events and have made hints of violence in placards seen during last week's teabagger protests.
Folks have a right to express their opinions, including those that strongly disagree with President Obama's policies and those of the Democratic leadership. But when my area's representative who also happens to be one of the main House Republicans made the statements that he did, it requires more than just mere comment. It requires that strong action be made to assure his defeat next year.
More below.
Progressives who don't know Pete Sessions have taken his his statement about disruptive town hall meetings out of context, as if he were challenging the screamers to "bring it on." But those of us in the District know that Pete Sessions is a coward. Re-read the Politico article and you'll meet a man who pines for a fantasy town hall meeting that never existed, where only "15 or 20 of your friends show up." But in today's town hall environment he's in his element. The screamers are his base. In this video, he answers a woman's health care concern by throwing them some red meat:
According to a Politico and Washington Monthly article, Session earmarked $1.6 million to a company he may or may not have questionable ties to.
[Sessions] steered a $1.6 million earmark for dirigible research to an Illinois company whose president acknowledges having no experience in government contracting, let alone in building blimps.
What the company did have: the help of Adrian Plesha, a former Sessions aide with a criminal record who has made more than $446,000 lobbying on its behalf.
Sessions has referred to earmarks in the past with unquestioning and unequivocal opposition. Saying earmarks are "a symbol of a broken Washington to the American people."
Of course, Pete Sessions staff member and spokeswoman Emily Davis defended the project before looking at a map. According to Politico, Davis said the airship project is a worthwhile use of federal funds and says it could eventually lead to thousands of new jobs in Sessions's Dallas-area district.
As mentioned above, the company is based in Illinois with a branch office in San Antonio.
Washington Monthly sums up the bizarre situation:
While lawmakers routinely support earmarks for their home district and/or state, this particular measure has nothing to do with Sessions' Dallas-area district. The company, Jim G. Ferguson & Associates, is based in a Chicago suburb. It has an office in Texas, but it's 300 miles from Sessions' district.
What's more, when Sessions submitted the earmark, he used a Dallas address for the company, but it was actually the address of a friend of one of the company's executives.
It looks a little suspicious. The leaders of Jim G. Ferguson & Associates admit they have no background in aviation or defense, and no expertise in engineering or research. It's why it seems odd that Sessions would direct $1.6 million to the company, most of which would go towards research and engineering on a dirigible project.
We use words like hypocrisy on this site a lot to sum up the Republican Party in Texas, but this extends well beyond a complex idea like hypocrisy. This seems, at the very worst, corrupt and at the very best, unethical.
Sessions is the National Republican Congressional Committee chairman (NRCC). He is in charge of both representing and electing Republicans to Congress.
In Texas, we have a distorted view of what a "swing seat" is for Democratic targeting. Given our multiple rounds of redistricting, true marginal seats in the traditional sense are hard to find. Texas Democrats either hail from incredibly safe districts, districts that are safe due to demographic trends but not ideology, or Republican districts where great Democrats make an exception (Chet Edwards).
That said, it's encouraging to see not one, but two Republican Congressional seats listed among the top 10 potential "dark horse" breakout races that are causing buzz in the Beltway. And not only that, but they are at the top of the list.
McCaul was technically a lower-tier Democratic target in 2008, but that was really only because his opponent, former TV judge Larry Joe Doherty (D), was raising money like gangbusters. Doherty really didn't have the right profile, and he wound up losing by a pedestrian 11 points - the exact margin of the presidential tally in the district. Now, Democrats have another big-money candidate, with businessman Jack McDonald raising $300,000 in the first quarter. We'll see if he has the right profile, but the fact that he is vice chairman of the Greater Austin Chamber of Commerce suggests he might. The party has already put McCaul near the top of its target list.
4. Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Texas)
Democrats tried to mount a late charge in 2006 against National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) Chairman Tom Reynolds (R-N.Y.), and they could do it again in 2010 against current NRCC Chairman Pete Sessions. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) only took this suburban Dallas district 53-46 in the 2008 presidential race, and the heavily Hispanic areas have grown at a faster pace than the white areas. Sessions's district is actually probably more fertile ground than McCaul's, but Democrats might not have as good a candidate. Attorney Grier Raggio (D) has an exploratory committee, but it's not clear who else might emerge.
In TX-10, Democrat Jack McDonald expressed earlier today that there is good reason to be paying attention to the 10th yet again, having raised over $634,000 to date with over half a million on hand, even while in exploratory mode and having yet to roll out campaign staff or field. While there isn't a equivalent Democratic response in TX-32 up in Dallas as of yet, the more competitive nature of the district and county coordinated campaign there provides a bit more breathing room for a top notch candidate to get settled.
