Cross-posted from michiganliberal.com
The Michlib
U.S. House section is here! It comes with all the usual features, including clickable district maps, biographic, demographic, and information from previous elections. We've also added known challengers, and will be adding more news and analysis as the 2006 campaign unfolds. BTW - YOU can add info too! Just like all of the Michigan state House and Senate pages, the Michlib U.S. House section allows user comments (though few have taken advatage of this feature yet).
Last, but not least, we offer you
Practical Political Consulting partner Alan Fox's in-depth analysis of all Michigan congressional races, as recorded in my interview with him last week. Here it is:
(continue reading below the fold)
CD
|
Member
|
2004 %
|
Kerry %
|
02
|
Hoekstra
|
69.3
|
39.3
|
03
|
Ehlers
|
66.6
|
40.3
|
10
|
Miller
|
68.6
|
43.2
|
04
|
Camp
|
64.4
|
44.6
|
07
|
Schwarz
|
58.4
|
44.9
|
08
|
Rogers
|
61.1
|
45.7
|
01
|
Stupak
|
66.7
|
46.1
|
06
|
Upton
|
65.3
|
46.7
|
11
|
McCotter
|
57.0
|
47.5
|
09
|
Knollenberg
|
58.5
|
49.2
|
05
|
Kildee
|
68.3
|
59.2
|
12
|
Levin
|
70.5
|
60.7
|
15
|
Dingell
|
72.8
|
61.5
|
15
|
Kilpatrick
|
80.9
|
81.0
|
14
|
Conyers
|
85.9
|
82.4
|
Matt Ferguson interview with Alan Fox, October, 2005
MF: So what's the big picture as far as Michigan's Congressional races are
concerned. Is there any potential for movement in 2006?
AF: The big picture is the districting plan is one that was adopted by
a Republican legislature and a Republican governor and its one of the
most skillfully drawn and gerrymandered maps in the country.
It's
skillfully drawn in that it doesn't look like a gerrymander. All of the
districts are nice and squareish and compact and they don't sprawl all
over the place. But the effect of the redistricting is to concentrate
Democratic votes in a handful of districts and spread the Republicans
out over a number of districts to give the Republicans a solid majority
in the congressional delegation.
We have a table that shows the Kerry percentage in each district, and
what's remarkable is that John Kerry won the state of Michigan by a
comfortable percentage, but he only won five congressional districts
out of 15. He won all five of them by margins of about 60% or more. He
got over 45% in another five districts. But only in one or two of those
districts did he really approach 50%. The Republicans really did spread
their votes out very nicely. They created a bunch of districts spread
throughout the metro area and out state that are just tantalizingly out
of reach for the Democrats. They've got 55-45 Republican margins, and
so Democrats can look at those and say, well, maybe there's a
shot...but if you get a good candidate in a good year you cut that
margin down, but you don't quite get it into the win column.
Now that said, there are two districts that, for reasons having to do
with partisan shifts since the plan was adopted, do begin to look like
Democrats might have a shot at them in a good year, which 2006 is
looking to be. These are districts that are based in the Western Wayne
and Oakland County suburbs, held by Joe Knollenberg and Thaddeus
McCotter. Those are the two districts that were carried by Bush, but
represent Bush's smallest margins. In Knollenberg's district, Bush won
with a little less than 51%, and in McCotter's, it was about
52.5%. Like I said, both of those districts were designed to be more
Republican than that. I think the Republicans thought they would stay
as Republican as they were when they were drawn. But both of them have
trended Democratic in recent years - and if that trend continues,
there's a strong Democratic candidate, and a strong Democratic year
- and those are three big "ifs" - those two seats are conceivably
in play this year. And they're the ones to watch. They're really the
only seats where there's any chance, under current circumstances, of
them changing hands.
There's one seat that Bush carried that's held by a Democratic member
of Congress, and that's the only seat in the state where the member of
Congress is of the opposite party of the presidential winner - and
there's mention of it just because of that fact. It's the 1st district
in the Upper Peninsula and northern lower Michigan, held by Bart Stupak
(D-Menominee). Stupak is the member of the Congressional delegation who
ran farthest ahead of his presidential candidate. He got two-thirds of
the vote in a district where Kerry got 46% of the vote. The Republicans
look at the seat, and I think they've been candid about it, they look
at it as one they hope to win once Stupak is out of the picture. But as
long as Stupak is running for re-election, I don't see any realistic
shot at it, and I don't think they're making any plans for it.
Pete Hoekstra (R-Holland)
MF: This is a very Republican district.
AF: Yeah, that's the western shore district. It's got a couple of spots
that have trended Democratic. Muskegon, and a couple of the counties
north of Muskegon have moved a little bit Democratic. But the
population base is south of there in the heavily Dutch areas - in
Allegan and Ottawa counties. It was Bush's best district in 2004 - he
got 61% - and Hoekstra still ran 10% ahead of Bush. That's not going
Democratic in our lifetime.
Vern Ehlers (R-Grand Rapids)
MF: This district covers Grand Rapids - we've heard that's started to
go more Democratic...but it doesn't look real likely according to these
numbers.
AF: Again, that's a district that has some areas that are going
Democratic - primarily in the city of Grand Rapids - but it includes
all of the suburban Kent county areas that are not moving Democratic.
Democrats held what was essentially that seat in the mid-1970's, but at
this point it's got a 60% Bush vote. Ehlers is very popular...there are
some rumors he might retire and I think the big battle in that district
will occur when Ehlers finally does retire and there's a huge
Republican primary to succeed him, but it's not going to go Democratic.
Candice Miller (R-Harrison Twp.)
MF: This is David Bonior's old district. It's now represented by
Candice Miller, the former Republican Secretary of State. You can see
why Bonior decided to give up on Congress and try to run for Governor
instead (in 2002) by looking at these numbers.
AF: Yeah, it's Bonior's old seat in designation only. It had a bunch of
heavily Republican areas added to it, and heavily Republican areas of
Macomb County that he had not represented added to it. Everything was
done to make that Candy Miller's district and it resulted in a district
where Bush got 57% of the vote, Miller got 70% of the vote. About the
only thing you can say about it is that Miller toyed with the idea of
running for Governor this year, but decided not to. At some point she
going to run for statewide office - Governor or U.S. Senate - and the
seat will open up again. It will be decided, probably, in the
Republican primary. But, you know, that 43% Kerry vote is enough to
make somebody think "well, maybe, with a tailwind and a divisive
Republican primary, maybe", which is exactly the sort of thinking that
can get you up to 47% or 48% but probably won't go Democratic.
Dave Camp (R-Midland)
MF: Slightly less Republican than Hoekstra, Ehlers, or Miller - but not by much. What do we know about him?
AF: Again, it's a district that was drawn carefully to be just
Republican enough to stay out of the Democrats' reach, but not so
Republican that Republican votes were wasted and couldn't go into other
districts. Camp's district sheds some Republican votes into Mike
Rogers' district, for example. Camp had enough of a margin to do that
with. There's no Democrat with a real base there. It's a district where
Bush got 55% and Camp got 65%, and Democrats are not going to take a
real shot at it. The district was last held by Democrats when Don
Albosta represented it in the 1970's for a couple of terms. He's
probably a model of what it would take to win that district - a farmer,
not liberal - by any stretch of the imagination - and there's really
nobody else like him coming up. In addition, the Traverse City area,
which is now part of the district, has gotten more and more populated -
and more and more Republican. So if there's any growth factor in the
district, it's Republican, not Democratic.
MF: Maybe if there was another Bart Stupak floating around somewhere?
AF: Even a Bart Stupak couldn't win election to the Legislature in that
district. Shiawassee County and Saginaw county have had
Democratic state representatives, but they're kind of off on one side
of the district and there isn't much to work with.
MF: That's probably the most awkwardly configured district. It goes all
the way up from Shiawassee county in the south (near Lansing and Flint)
to Midland, and all the way up to Leelenau county in north...
AF: To the Fox Islands, even...The district, I think, is always the one
that's left over when you carve up the rest of the state. It's in the
middle of the state, and once you've carved up where the U.P.
district is, and given everybody else what's south and west of it,
what's left over is always going to be pretty Republican.
Joe Schwarz (R-Battle Creek)
MF: Joe Schwarz is perceived by many to be a moderate Republican. That
was thought to be somewhat of a possibility for Democrats last time,
after the big Republican primary fight.
AF: Well again, it's one of those where the numbers make it somewhat of
a possibility. The possibility there is that, I think, Republican
conservatives who are still unreconciled to Schwarz's narrow win in a
multi-candidate primary two years ago, are looking for one credible
candidate to take him on. It's conceivable that a right-wing candidate
could defeat Schwarz in a primary. I don't think its likely, but
it's conceivable - but it would make more of an opening for a Democrat.
If Schwarz wins the primary, I don't think he's beatable. I think he
can at least hold the party base there, he's a little bit stronger, he
picks up moderate and independent voters. If the Republicans do run
someone who is an extreme right-winger, then it's conceivable. I don't
know who the Democratic horse is in that case, and I don't know if
there's any Democrat who has the credibility to run and wants to run
just in case Schwarz loses. That would probably be the third most
likely to switch parties after McCotter and Knollenberg - but that's
not saying a great deal. Still, Democrats should keep an eye on it,
because there could be an opening there.
MF: I could imagine if someone who is a credible Democrat did get in
the race that might have an impact on which Republicans decide to
challenge Schwarz, i.e. the might just decide to sit it out.
AF: It might. But I tend to think the people who are really rabid about
Schwarz are rabid enough - from the right - that those sort of
practical considerations won't matter to them. But I don't know yet
that any Republican is even doing it yet. We've heard rumors that
(former state Rep.) Tim Walberg, who ran two years ago, is looking at
it again...
MF: Would he be a credible candidate to take down Schwarz?
AF: My perception is that even though Schwarz's numbers were not
overwhelming, I don't think he's in any great danger. He may have to
spend some money, but I suspect the right wing isn't going to take him
on. He gets some more credibility now, just by virtue of being an
incumbent. He hasn't done anything to really enrage the right wing,
except being himself...
MF: He voted in their favor on the Terri Schiavo case, and some of the
House leaders are coming to do campaign fundraising appearances for
him. So it appears to have made some friends in the power structure -
despite his more moderate views on some things.
AF: The power structure is interested in holding Republican seats, and
they're willing to bend a little bit in exchange for being able to
continue chairing committees and running the House. Although Schwarz's
image is as a moderate, there are really very few votes where he
disagrees substantially with the majority of Republicans. That
should reduce his danger. He's not someone who's thumbing his nose at
the right wing in the district. One imagines that he's been courting
people quietly. I think he probably will still have a primary, but I
don't think it'll get very far and I don't think it'll be well-funded.
Mike Rogers (R-Brighton)
MF: Both you and I have connections to this district (besides living in
it). You used to work for U.S. Rep. Bob Carr, who represented an
earlier incarnation of this district, and I spent much of last year as
a Dem primary candidate for the 8th. The thing that jumps out at me
here is that the Kerry percentage in the Rogers district is actually
slightly better than in Schwarz's.
AF: Yeah, but Rogers doesn't have a right-flank to worry about. The
district was originally drawn, of course, to take a district that was
50-50 and give it to Mike Rogers to give him a few more points. I don't
think the Republicans ever assumed it would be an overwhelmingly
Republican district. On the other hand, it's just enough out of reach
that it hasn't attracted any well-funded Democratic opponents...
MF: That's the truth.(laughter)
AF: Dianne Byrum is term-limited this year, she ran against Rogers in
2000 in a more Democratic district by 11 votes. If there was going to
be a Democrat who was going to mount a credible challenge to Rogers, it
would be Byrum putting it together for the last year, mending fences,
and convincing people that she wouldn't make the same mistakes she made
six years ago, etc. That hasn't happened. And so that suggests to me
that its not on anybody's list.
In the old says, when you had changes overtaking the country and things
sort of shifting and individual members of congress not as visible as
they are now, you could think of this as a district where a big
Democratic tide could surprise an incumbent. Incumbents now - even
incumbents in good shape - are polling constantly, they know what's
going on, they don't get caught by surprise at all. So you're not going
to have somebody come out of nowhere to beat Rogers. Even a credible
candidate who is well-funded would have their hands full. He has a ton
of money, he's raised money for other candidates, he's raised money for
himself. Interestingly enough, he only ran about eight points ahead of
Bush in the district, which is not a great margin - there are only a
couple of other members who ran that close to their presidential
candidate - so he's not particularly strong. But the district is JUST
Republican enough that he should be able to hold on. If the Democrats
had unlimited resources, I would advise doing it just to bloody him a
little bit to keep him pinned down, and keep him from expanding his
base outside the district. He's clearly someone with statewide
ambitions, or leadership ambitions in Congress. But the resources are
limited, and that's going to argue against doing anything in that
district.
MF: What if Dianne Byrum suddenly decided to get in? She's term-limited
out of the House and has nothing else to do. Why not make one more go
at it, just in case it's a really good Democratic year?
AF: That would be what it would take. But she'd also need to raise
about a million and a half dollars. The question is, what is the source
for $1.5 million to make that a credible effort? I don't think she
wants to end her political career by jumping into something, not
spending enough money, getting clobbered, and leaving public life that
way. I think that's going to argue against her doing it. She may be the
only person who could pull that together, but I don't see that
happening.
Bart Stupak (D-Menominee)
MF: Why does Stupak run so far ahead of Kerry? What's his attraction up there?
AF: There are two things. One is that the Upper Peninsula and northern
Lower Peninsula - which is where his district is - is where the Kerry
vote was behind party base. Those are not Ann Arbor - East Lansing
leftist Democrats up there, and independent voters and even some
Democrats voted for Bush. Kerry numbers don't represent party baseline
- the U.P. is still predominantly Democratic in most races, even though
Kerry did poorly there. So, that 46% Kerry doesn't really represent the
Democratic strength there.
On top of that, Stupak perfectly mirrors what the district is looking
for. He has a law enforcement background, I don't think you'll find him
on the wrong side of right-to-bear-arms issues...
MF: He's pro-life...
AF: He's pro-life, and he culturally fits in very well with the U.P.
and the northern Lower Peninsula, and he's beaten some credible
opponents. (Republican National Committeeman) Chuck Yob ran against
him, without Stupak having a lot of trouble. In 2004, he ran 20 points
ahead of Kerry. No other Michigan member of Congress ran more than 13
points ahead of their presidential candidate. So he's really got a lot
of strength there.
It's a district the Republicans have on their wait list - they'll take
a shot at it when he retires. But until then, they're going to let it
go.
MF: Has a Republican ever held that seat?
AF: The seat was held for many years by Bob Davis, who was from the
northern Lower Peninsula. Before that it was Phil Ruppee. It was
Republican from about 1966 to whenever Stupak won it in the 1980s (I
think). So yeah, it was Republican for quite awhile. Ruppee came from
the U.P. and was a moderate, (former Gov.) Bill Milliken Republican. He
gave up the seat in 1978 intending to run for U.S. Senate when Bob
Griffin decided he did want to run for another term after all, Ruppee
was iced out of his own seat. Davis won it that year when Democrats
were divided in their primary, and eventually he fell victim to the
checking scandal in Congress, didn't run, and that's when Stupak was
able to win it.
MF: So Stupak won it as an open seat..
AF: Yeah, and I think Ruppee actually tried to reclaim it that year -
or the next - I can't remember. So yeah, it's been Republican -
and the Upper Peninsula's growth hasn't matched the Lower Peninsula
part of the district, to the U.P.'s influence is shrinking. As the
district creeps further down into the Lower Peninsula, they've picked
up more and more Republican areas. It's certainly a winnable seat for
them, but Stupak's not the incumbent they can beat there.
Fred Upton (R-St. Joseph)
MF: This looks like almost the reverse of U.S. Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Menominee)...
AF: Upton has the second best lead over his presidential candidate of
all the Michigan U.S. House members. He was re-elected with just over
two-thirds of the vote - about 66.8%. That's a district that Democrats
have never held - maybe in 1932. It's the descendant of the old David
Stockman/Edward Hutchinson district. It's always been very Republican,
very conservative Republican. What happened in the redistricting is
that Kalamazoo was taken out of a more central district, put into that
district, and that's given a Democratic base in the district.
Suddenly, John Kerry gets over 46.5% there. I don't think when that was
drawn, the Republicans viewed that as a district that would get
up to 46.5% Democratic. Upton is fairly moderate, so he's not
attracting a lot of attention. And it's probably still Republican
enough so that it's just out of reach. But it's sure surprising to see
it as the eight most Democratic district out of 15. You would not have
picked that just looking at the map. It looks like it should be a much
more Republican district. But there it is, and there are a couple of
places that have some Democratic strength, and its conceivable that
someday a Democrat could come out of Kalamazoo with a tailwind and a
big, big margin out of Kalamazoo and swamp the rest of the district.
It's not happening this election. I don't think it's likely to happen
as long as Upton is there. But you could conceive of a time in the
future when Upton retires and an extremely conservative or weak
Republican is on the ballot, and the Democrats could conceivable win
it. It's just not going to happen soon.
Thaddeus McCotter (R-Livonia)
MF: What exactly does the 11th district encompass?
AF: The 11th district was drawn by McCotter himself - he was the state
Senator on the committee who did the lines. It has a chunk of Wayne
County, Redford Twp, Livonia, Westland - and the western part of
Oakland County. It was drawn to be Republican. I think it was assumed
to be more Republican than its turned out to be. Kerry got 47.5% there,
which is not an overwhelming margin, but its not a bad percentage for a
Democrat. McCotter has not looked particularly strong. Other than in
the two Detroit districts, which are so heavily Democratic that the
members of Congress can't get very far ahead of the ticket, McCotter
was the weakest incumbent member compared to a presidential candidate.
So in a district where Bush took 56.2%, McCotter got 58.1 - only
1.9% ahead of Bush. What's more remarkable about that is that he didn't
have particularly strong opposition. It was not a situation where he
was running against a well-funded, well-publicized opponent. So
McCotter now finds himself in a situation where he's in a district
that's only marginally Republican and turning more Democratic, he
doesn't have the personal strength that some of the more long-term
incumbents might have and there may well be the smell of blood in the
water there. I think this is the district that is most likely to change
parties. I don't know if its up to the point of being 50-50 where it
will change parties. It's still more likely to go to McCotter than a
Democrat. But it's the first district to watch because McCotter's base
is not as strong as I think he thought it would be and his personal
strength is not as strong. The question is, do the Democrats have a
horse there. If there's a well-funded Democrat with a base there who
doesn't make mistakes, that's the most likely seat to win over.
MF: Tell me more about the district. What are the real Democratic and
Republican strongholds there? Or is it just kind of a mish-mash?
AF: It's pretty much a mish-mash. Redford has a Democratic base,
so does Westland. The Oakland County stuff is not Democratic at all.
But it is kind of moving that way. Livonia is Republican, but its
sliding slightly more Democratic. It doesn't have any place that's
really overwhelming. It includes Novi, which is Republican, it includes
Northville and Plymouth, which is Republican - but on the other hand,
it's where Governor Granholm comes from - so there's been some
Democratic trend there. So...there's no one part of it where the
Democrat comes out with a huge margin. It's got to be picked at kind of
a little at a time. But the district as a whole is sliding slightly
Democratic.
MF: I forgot that McCotter actually drew his own district, and no it
may be coming back to bite him. Did he just get too cocky? It seems
like he could have peeled off a little bit of the 8th from Mike Rogers.
AF: It's a tricky thing drawing a partisan district map, because the
Republicans are trying to gain as many seats as they can, and the only
thing you have to go on is what the numbers are today and what the
history has been today. You can try to anticipate what's going to
happen in your head. But the crystal balls aren't as good as the hard
numbers on the page. So when they looked at the numbers through the
2000 election, it looks like a district that's roughly comparable to
the Upton district, or say the Rogers district: 45-46% Democratic,
54-55% Republican - which, again, puts it on that list of seats that
are just out of reach for the Democrats - just tantalizingly close. A
shift of a couple of points makes that a very different district and
that is what's happened there, and perhaps even more in the Knollenberg
district. The shifts in partisanship were not anticipated by the people
who drew the map. I'm not sure they could have done much if they had
anticipated it, because they really did build them very carefully in
putting Republicans into those districts and putting them into other
districts that are closely balanced. I think they were in a situation
where - for example - Rogers was an incumbent and they're not going to
sacrifice Rogers just so McCotter can have a district that is pretty
comfortably Republican.
MF: As I recall, they really wanted to give Rogers a nice cushy district at that point...
AF: That was a big focus. He won the 2000 election by 111 votes and
that was the first priority. Their second priority was to knock of Dave
Bonior, which was accomplished by giving Candice Miller the third most
Republican district in the state. Then they wanted to pick up other
seats where they could. But those were going to be of necessity a lower
priority than Rogers and the Candy Miller seat.
Joe Knollenberg (R-Bloomfield Twp.)
AF: The seat held by Joe Knollenberg is trending even more Democratic
Knollenberg has been in office for several terms - he was not a
newcomer in 2002. He's got some personal strength and he has a district
now where John Kerry got over 49% of the vote - Kerry came within 5,500
votes of beating Bush. This is also a district that's slowly becoming
more and more Democratic over time: West Bloomfield, Bloomfield Hills,
Troy...and some of the other Oakland County suburbs are trending
Democratic. The Republicans know these numbers as well as anyone else
knows them, so none of it is catching them by surprise. But it's a
district that has a big enough Democratic base now, that in a
knock-down, drag out fight with both sides knowing what's going on, a
Democrat could still win in a good year. The question for the Democrats
is, who do they have who can go toe-to-toe with Knollenberg and take it
from him? It's certainly - by the numbers - at the top of the list. I
actually think because of Knollenberg's strength it's a less likely
pickup than McCotter...
MF: Even though the Kerry numbers are slightly better.
AF: Even though the Kerry numbers are Better. Knollenberg runs
nine points ahead of Bush, where McCotter's running 5.5 points ahead of
Bush. And so that indicates that he's got a little bit of personal
strength that McCotter does not have. That makes it easier for an
incumbent to weather a storm. If I have to do percentages, I would
think that the Knollenberg seat is a little less likely to be a pickup
seat than McCotter. But they're the two seats that stand out, and the
question for the Democrats is can they come up with the resources and
the candidate to do two serious challenges and can they - as it gets
down to the last few weeks of the campaign - move resources around to
whichever seat is necessary, to whichever seat looks like it stands the
best chance. They may only get one of the two. And it may turn out to
be a question of moving resources around at the last minute in order to
do that. It's conceivable both of the seats could go Democratic. But
the odds are not good for it. The Democratic numbers look good, but
they still are under 50% and there still are Republican incumbents with
all of the Republican fundraising resources that Republicans have. So
it's an uphill fight in a way. But if you add, you know, a few points
of Democratic surge to those numbers, they're races that could tip.
MF: Where do you think these two districts would be on the national
charts of races to look at? They might look good sitting here in East
Lansing, but to someone sitting in the DCCC (Democratic Congressional
Campaign Committee) in Washington, would these even be on their radar?
AF: One reason they would not be is that there are Republican
incumbents running for re-election. National organizations tend to look
for open seats. But there aren't a lot of open seat opportunities
around the country. I would think the Knollenberg seat will get
stronger attention, because of that 49.2% Kerry number, and that may
well be the first thing they're looking at. There are some districts
that Kerry won that are held by Republican incumbents - around the
country, not in Michigan - so that will be their first thing they're
looking at. But this has got to be just below that. What gets a
district to move up on the list as much as anything, though, is having
a horse - having a candidate who has credibility, if not money to begin
with, enough credibility that they can be seen as a logical fundraising
candidate. That moves races up on the list. There are things like that
that aren't reflected in the election numbers and they may well put one
or both of those seats on there. Those conditions don't exist yet.
We're not talking about any particular Democratic candidate running
yet, we're not talking about anybody having done the fundraising, or
looking like they can do the fundraising. They are seats - at this
point - that the state Democratic Party should be looking for a
credible candidate, rather than waiting for things to sort themselves
out. Somebody will get in who gets in too late, and doesn't have the
opportunity to get to Washington and convince people that the district
should be bumped up on the list.
MF: How soon do they need to have someone on the ground and running for it not to be too late?
AF: I think there should be somebody now. I think the window is only
another month or two. In 1976, Howard Wolpe - who was then a State
Representative from Kalamazoo - prepared to run for Congress against
Harry Brown in the old Kalamazoo-Battle Creek seat, before the two were
split up. I helped him do some of the targeting in that race and some
of the planning and we made our trip to Washington to talk to the
people involved and to interview consultants and to let people know
that the race should be on the map, right after Labor Day in 1975. That
was three or four weeks ago on our calendar now. But that race was
planned the summer before. It may well be that both of those districts
are in danger of slipping off the opportunity list and that's too bad,
because they ought to be places where people are looking to get in now.
MF: We've talked about this before, but for national people who might
read this, why is Oakland County shifting to the Democrats?
AF:I think there are two things happening. One is, I think the voters
in Oakland County are the kind of voters who are voting on cultural
issues, more than economic issues. So they see the Republican Party as
insensitive, as overly right-wing, and not environmental, and negative
in a lot of other ways as being a closed party. The other thing that's
happening, not so much in these two districts, but there's a little bit
of it, the minority population of both the McCotter and Knollenberg
districts is slowly growing. Southfield, which is the first inner ring
suburb, which is in U.S. Rep. Sandy Levin's district (D-Southfield), is
now majority minority. That's happening in other parts of Oakland as
well. In the McCotter and Knollenberg districts it's not so much that
there are black neighborhoods, but it's that there are upper-middle
class African-American voters, and other minorities - Arab voters and
so on - moving out from Detroit and from Dearborn, moving into upscale
areas and they have tended to stay with the Democratic party as they
move up the ladder. So I think both of those aspects are affecting
these districts.
The critical thing is that the Republican Party has painted itself as
the party of religious zealots, the party that's not strong on
education, the party that is opposed to public employees and to
teachers, and that's left it more and more out of tune with suburban
voters in Oakland County and western Wayne County.
MF: But these are pretty affluent areas - traditionally what you would
think of as being solidly Republican territory, am I right? I believe
the Knollenberg seat has the highest per-capita income of any of the 15
congressional districts.
AF: Yep, that's true. But what affluence in some cases leads to is
voters deciding that they can vote on issues other than on their
pocketbooks. The real pocketbook voters tend not to be always the most
affluent.
MF: Is that a trend we're seeing in other places around the country?
AF: Yeah. I think it was a trend in both the 2000 and 2004 presidential
elections, where Gore and Kerry did much better among suburban voters
than Democrats ordinarily do - Clinton started that. So you have the
phenomenon of Democrats regaining strength in suburbs that they haven't
seen since the 60's, when cultural issues drove voters to the
Republican Party. And yet, because of loses in other areas - mainly in
small towns and rural areas, not being able to win the presidency.
MF: Maybe people who are more affluent are more likely to be intellectuals...
AF: I think there's some connection there, to the extent that the
affluence is based, not so much on sales or manufacturing, but more on
information technology, that sort of thing. That tends to be a more
liberal base of voters.
MF: More likely to be college educated...
AF: More likely to be college educated, and to care about the values of
public education and public universities. You also have a thing which I
think IS unique to Michigan, which is the commitment to environmental
issues, that really spans partisanship in Michigan. And so, of course,
people in Oakland County are the most likely of anybody to have that
place up north and to want to keep it green and keep it protected. So
there's always been a bit of a green vote, even if in the conservative
parts of the state.
AF: Next we have five districts which were drawn Democratic, and they
are as solidly Democratic as they come. The only thing you can say
about them is that of the five Democratic incumbents, I think four of
them are in their 70s, so at some point somebody is going to retire or
die and there will be a big Democratic primary.
Dale Kildee (D-Flint)
MF: Is there a chance the Republicans will ever take this seat?
AF: No. That seat is now a Flint-Saginaw seat. For a long time Saginaw
and Bay City were in one district, Flint was in the other. The
Republicans combined them, knowing that would make it more Democratic.
The last Republican to hold the Flint seat was Don Riegle (who became a
Democrat and a U.S. Senator), and I don't think there are any Don
Riegles...
MF: And he wasn't a Republican for long.
AF: Well, he won that seat more often as a Republican than as a
Democrat. He's not the kind of Republican that Republicans associate
with anymore. So Kerry got 59%, Kildee got 68%, and that one isn't
going anywhere.
MF: What if Kildee retires? He has family scattered all over the place up there...
AF: I suppose one of them could do it. But there you have Saginaw
and Bay City that used have their own member of Congress and there are
people there who are now second fiddle to Flint, and so you've got a
little bit of a clash in that. But the population is so overwhelmingly
in the Flint area that the Saginaw-Bay City people don't pull off.
Sander Levin (D-Southfield)
AF: This takes in the Oakland and Macomb suburbs that they didn't want
to give to Knollenberg or Candy Miller. It includes Southfield, it
includes Warren, it includes some other liberal Democratic suburbs in
Oakland county, it gave Kerry 60.7%, Levin 70.5%. There will be
someboday on the ballot for the Republicans but that's as far as it
will go.
I just noticed something interesteing in looking at Levin's numbers
here, and just how Democratic the district is. Look at the most
Republican district - Pete Hoekstra's district on the west side of the
state. They're exact mirror images. Levin got 70.5%, Hoekstra got
70.5%. Kerry got 60.7% in Levin's district. Bush got 60.7% in
Hoekstra's district. So it is as Democratic as the most Republican
district in the state. And yet it's only the fourth most Democratic
district, because of how the Democratic votes were packed into that
handful of districts.
MF: Just to make this more interesting, let's throw out the scenario
that Levin retires. What kind of Democratic candidate would do well in
that district?
AF: That would be an interesting wide open Democratic primary. One of
the things the Republicans did in building the district, is that they
threw stuff together that's going to sort of collide. So you've got the
very liberal Jewish areas of Oakland county, with the blue collar areas
of Macomb county. It's gonna be an Oakland vs. Macomb primary. There
could be many, many candidates. It's a little hard to say who's going
to come out of that. It's real hard to say how that's going to work
out, and I don't know what the balance is. In a primary, it's going to
be lots of people knocking on doors and putting up signs, and probably
end up being what the analysts call a "friends and neighbors" sort of
election, where it's the candidate who can best rally their hometown
and their base that's going to win a primary with 27% and then become a
Congressman for life.
John Dingell (D-Dearborn)
MF: John Dingell is the longest serving member of the ENTIRE U.S.
House, he's been there since 1958. Should he ever decide to retire,
there is a successor floating around...his son Chris was a state
Senator for a number of years...
AF: ...was a state Senator, is now a judge. No, actually, Debbie
Dingell, his wife would like to run for the seat. But there's no sign
that Dingell's going to retire. He's in good health, he's about 80
years old now, he's been a member of Congress longer than anyone else...
MF: His dad was a member of Congress...
AF: His father was a member of Congress, the seat's been in the family
since 1933. Though...the seat has moved. When John Dingell Sr. - and
even when John Jr. - were first elected, that district was
entirely within the city of Detroit. The west side of the district got
bumped out to the suburbs, and now it goes all the way to Ann Arbor.
Again, it was very carefully built to do two things. One is to keep all
the Democrats they could out of McCotter's district and out of the
Schwarz district, but also to put two Democrats in the same district so
that only one would emerge...
MF: Lynn Rivers.
AF: Yeah, and this district will also be interesting when the incumbent
is gone, because the liberal Democrats in Ann Arbor think about it as
their seat. My understanding is that Debbie Dingell has been very
visible in Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti, and so the plans for an orderly
succession are underway and it may be a situation where there isn't a
big primary. I don't think we're going to see any primary in the near
future. John Dingell is probably going to stay there as long as
he can.
Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick (D-Detroit)
John Conyers, Jr. (D-Detroit)
MF: U.S. Rep. Kilpatrick is, of course, the mother of the current Mayor
of Detroit. We'll leave all speculation about Republicans far behind.
But what if she ever leaves?
AF: There will be a hundred other legislators, former term-limited legislators...
MF: People with the same names as former legislators, maybe...Martha
Reeves (the Motown star and Detroit City Council candidate) - I
don't know where she lives...
AF: The nice thing is the City Council is elected in odd-numbered
years, so everybody on the Council - they've all got huge bases -
there are going to be lots and lots of candidates for either the
Kilpatrick seat or the Conyers seat. The Conyers seat will probably
open up before the Kilpatrick seat. Conyers is older than Kilpatrick.
It is conceivable someone could run against him in a primary - although
I believe that period has faded. After his mayoral runs, where he
really flopped badly, he was really seen as vulnerable and I think
people regarded him as...
MF: When did he run for mayor?
AF: He ran a couple of times. He ran when (Dennis) Archer was elected (1993)...
MF: He ran in a primary against Archer...
AF: Yeah, and he came in like 92nd or something. He ran way, way behind.
MF: I never knew that.
AF: Well, he didn't make much of an impression when he ran. But he has,
I think revived his fortunes. He's the ranking Democrat on the House
Judiciary Committee, and seen by a lot of people as sort of leading the
opposition to the Bush Administration on a lot of issues. And so to the
extent that there's any grumbling going on that he's ineffective, I
think that's subsided from where it was a couple of years ago. He's
also likely to be able to serve out as long as he wants.
Now this district has an interesting possibility. First of all, it
extends downriver, almost to Grosse Ile. So it's got some Democratic
suburbs - it's got part of Dearborn now. It also has some white state
legislators in it. I don't think it's at all likely that say a (State
Sen.) Burt Leland would win an open race there, but I could conceive of
a situation with a 12-way Democratic primary with legislators and
former legislators and people with the same names of former legislators
and people who have run for City Council, and were on City Council,
that a well-known State Senator could win a primary there and take the
seat.
MF: As I recall, last time around, State Senator Buzz Thomas briefly
went through the motions of attempting to run, but then quickly backed
out.
AF: He filed against Conyers, and then withdrew three days later.
MF: Of course, Conyers' wife, I believe ran against Thomas before that....
AF: She also ran for City Council. Yeah, never underestimate family politics.
MF: That's really the name of the game in Detroit, isn't it? I mean
just about every legislator in the city has had a relative elected, or
someone they're grooming...the Lelands, the Lemmonses, the Hoods, the
Kilpatricks...have any of Conyers' relatives actually been elected?
AF: They've run...Actually, if you look at all of the Democratic
members of Congress in Michigan, each of them has either had a relative
who has either held or sought office. Stupak's wife was a mayor and ran
for State Representative, Kildee, I think, has a nephew who is a public
official in Genesee County, Levin's brother, of course, is a U.S.
Senator, Dingell's son is a former state Senator, now a judge,
Kilpatrick's son is Mayor of Detroit, and Conyers' wife has run for
office. So all of them have had relatives who have run for office, and
all of them have relatives with hopes of succeeding them at some point.
MF: How does the national scene affect all of this? I would presume it
would have more of an impact of races for the federal level than
state-level races?
AF: I think it does have a more direct impact and it has the
Republicans worried - you can read about that almost anywhere from the
New York Times on down. The Republicans right now - in Congress and the
administration - have scandals, they have clear ineptitude at the
handling of the hurricane disasters - they have all the signs of a
party that's been in power too long and needs shaking up. And that's
got the Republicans very worried. It's also a year away from the
election, so it's a little too soon to say how that's going to shake
out. But in a situation where there's three-dollar a gallon gas, and
Republicans being perceived as bungling the administration at each
level and aside from being a lame duck administration, Republican
leadership in Congress is under assault for campaign finance
violations...
MF: And if the DeLay trial lingers on and on...
AF: The DeLay trial may very well be very active late next year. That's
exactly the sort of perfect storm configuration that has Republicans
worried and the Democrats feeling like they could pick up more seats
than the numbers would otherwise suggest. It's an uphill battle - not
just in Michigan, because there are other states that were
gerrymandered; I don't know that Texas will be electing a host of
Democrats under their districting plan. And the election is not being
held today. If it were being held today, Democrats would do very
well....
MF: Assuming we had candidates.
AF: Assuming we had candidates and assuming you can base your analysis
on "would you support a Democrat or a Republican without having the
names and faces attached. So there are lots of things that could
change. The Democratic Party in this state is entirely capable of
missing opportunities. They've missed lots of opportunities before, but
may turn out to be the best opportunity during the 10-year period of
this districting plan to upset the apple cart and take the majority of
the delegation, despite the best laid plans of the Republicans who
designed the districts.
MF: How does the Governor's race effect the congressional races?
AF: It gives a central organizing reason to get the voters out. For
opposite reasons, it's one that doesn't look so good now, because
Granholm is faltering a little bit. Her numbers are down, but once we
get into the fall (2006), that's going to be the main thing that brings
people out - not so much the congressional races. So if Granholm
succeeds in drawing distinctions with DeVos, and as painting DeVos as a
dangerous character, that gives an umbrella, that along with the
national situation can be used to protect candidates.
MF: In other words, a lot of Republicans might not show up.
AF: If there's a perception among marginal Republican voters that the
Governor's race is lost, they may not be thinking about what the impact
of that race might be on Knollenberg or McCotter.
MF: They might not be wild about them either...or what's happening on the national level.
AF: The might not be wild enough to show up and vote for them and under
those circumstances might be good reasons for them to stay home. It's
also a situation where if independent voters are already voting for
Granholm, it makes it a little bit easier to draw them to the
Democratic side of the congressional race. If they're voting for both
Granholm and Stabenow, that makes it a lot easier to get them to keep
voting Democratic.