February 21, 2010

 These days, it seems politics is all about the numbers. Over the last year, you could not watch a news channel without hearing the number 60, or most recently “Mr. 41”. 12 trillion, the amount of our nation’s debt, seems to be a common theme for politicians on both sides of the aisle.  Now, spurring off of the anger over the out of control debt, a new number is becoming the topic of discussion in 2010—218.

On the Hill, 218 is a crucial number.  It is the number required to maintain a majority in the House of Representatives. That is something Democrats have enjoyed for the last four years, but time may be running out for them as they head into this year’s midterm elections. To reach the coveted 218 House seats, several numbers come into play: Poll numbers, the number of competitive races, cash on hand numbers, and the number of retirements.  All of these numbers must be in a party’s favor if to reach a majority in the House.

In the race to 218 seats, the biggest indicator of which party will be making the gains in an election year is the political landscape. As the Democrats attempted to jam through their tax and spend agendas against their constituents will, they immediately witnessed the consequences… a loss in Virginia and New Jersey. The liberal media argued that these upsets were not a referendum on the current administration and its policies, but rather the fault of weak candidates (case in point) but this theory was blown wide open after Scott Brown’s victory two and a half months later in deep blue Massachusetts.(case in point) Mark Preston, the author of both articles, shows just how deep the liberal media’s hypocrisy can go and in the end, there is no one left to point fingers at other than those who pushed the unpopular policies. These three historic elections serve as proof that the political landscape that swept the Democrats into the majority in 2006 is deteriorating right beneath their feet. With the political environment in the GOP’s favor, the numbers begin to come into play.

Poll Numbers

With the majority of citizens disapproving of the Obama, Pelosi, and Reid regime’s health care reform and the other tax and spend agendas, the congressional Generic Ballot is a great political thermometer for the strength of the National parties. You can find it here. The Generic Ballot is measured by party labels. A sample question would be, “If the elections for Congress were being held today, who would you vote for, Republican or Democrat?” Since Obama has taken office, the generic ballot has swung 9 points in favor of the GOP. It is quite shocking that a little over a year ago the Democrats were able to pickup 21 seats and now are at risk of giving all if not more of their pickups back to the GOP. It seems the numbers in the polls are in favor of Republicans, but are there enough seats up for grabs to gain the 40 needed for a Republican majority?

Number of Competitive Races

Charlie Cook is one of the top political handicappers in the nation. His Cook Political Report has been used by journalists, strategists, and politicians alike and is considered “the bible of the political community.” Used on both sides of the aisle, the report is a valuable tool for understanding the vulnerability of a congressional district.

Cook places the races into four categories

1. Solid: The incumbent has a clear advantage and there is little to no likelihood that the race will become competitive.
2. Likely: These seats are not considered competitive at this point but have the potential to become engaged.
3. Lean: These are considered competitive races but one party has an advantage.
4. Toss-up: These are the most competitive; either party has a good chance of winning.

According to Cook’s Competitive House Race Chart, the Democrats have 95 seats in play with 54 seats listed as lean, toss up, or takeovers. Republicans have 18 seats in play and only 6 listed as lean, toss-up, or takeover. Click here to see the full report.

There is no way to spin these numbers. Tim Kaine, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, commented this past Wednesday on CNBC’s “Morning Joe,” “Presidential midterms since Teddy Roosevelt have been very tough. The average president loses 28 seats, four Senate seats and governors’ races. And we’re not living in average times. We’re living in times of significant economic anxiety.” Even the head of the Democratic committee acknowledge that the Democrats are in deep trouble going into the elections this November. With 48 Democrats serving in districts McCain won, and with the political landscape shaping up the way it currently is, Republicans are at a distinct advantage, but do Republicans have the resources necessary to win back the House?

Cash on Hand Numbers

For Republicans to capitalize on the large number of seats that are possible takeovers, the challengers must have the resources needed to get their message out. Historically, incumbents have an overwhelming advantage in their cash on hand which can pose as a hurdle to those who wish to challenge them. Incumbents average about $350,000 in their war chest compared to $150,000 of challengers.

According to end of year FEC numbers, 52 Republican challengers have at least $150,000 cash on hand.  22 Republicans have reported $300,000 or more cash on hand. This is good news for the Republican Party, as many of the well funded challengers have forced several long-term incumbents, such as Bart Gordon (D-TN) and John Tanner (D-TN) to retire. With nine months to go until the elections, there is still plenty of time to increase the challenger’s cash on hands. Being well-funded going into the coming months will be key to major gains in the House. It appears there are enough well funded challengers, but incumbents have a significant advantage in the cash on hand game.  Retirements are the next key factor in the analysis.

Number of Retirements

Proponents of term limits definitely have the numbers on their side. In 2008, 94 percent of incumbents were reelected in the House of Representatives. What is even more disappointing is that this number has not fluctuated all that much. Since 1964, the lowest incumbent retention rate in the House was in 1970 when “only” 85 percent of incumbents were reelected. Nothing is more disheartening to a potential challenger than having to face a well funded incumbent who has the name recognition in the district, no matter how unpopular their voting record may be.

Taking these facts into account, thus far, there have been 13 Democrat retirements and 18 Republican retirements. The liberal media will be quick to point out that Republican retirements outnumber the Democrats, and will claim that this is proof that our own incumbents don’t believe we can take the majority. (case in point) On the surface, this seems to be a valid observation.  However, as Pete Sessions (R-TX),  Chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, said: “All retirements are not created equal.”  Of the 13 Democratic open seats, 6 are running for higher office. Of the 18 Republican seats, 12 are running for higher office. The large number of Republican retirements only serves as proof that Republicans are taking advantage of the toxic political environment for Democrats and feel comfortable seeking higher office.

Further disproving the media’s claims, of the 13 open Democratic seats, 10 are considered lean or toss up for the Democrats and only 2 for the Republicans. It seems Republicans have a significant edge over Democrats in the retirement count. Although this is not quite the Democratic exodus we saw in 1994 when 32 Democrats ran for the hills, more retirements are sure to come.

After reviewing the numbers, it seems Republicans are in prime position for a takeover of the House. To ensure victory at the polls, Republicans will need to increase their cash numbers and keep the number of retirements of incumbents not seeking higher office to a minimum while forcing out more Democrat incumbents. If they are able to achieve these goals, we will see a tidal wave of Republican victories and the map will be painted red once more.