Ever since a group called MassINC published a package called "Beyond Red and Blue: The 10 Regions of America" I've been obsessing over the role of geography in politics. "
Beyond Red and Blue" argued that rather than looking at the country in terms of "Blue" and "Red" it might make more sense to view the United States as encompassing ten regions of equal size (population-wise) but varying outlooks.
The regional breakdown is unconventional--for example, the "Upper Coasts" region includes not only the Pacific Northwest from Seattle to Portland, but also parts of New England.
In 2000, the study argues, the ten regions split down the middle, with Gore taking the five regions called "Upper Coasts," "Big River," "Northeast Corridor," "El Norte," and "Great Lakes," and Bush taking the others: "Sagebrush," "Farm Belt," "Appalachia," "Southern Lowlands," and "Southern Comfort." (I don't know enough about the Kerry data to say for certain, but I suspect Kerry won the same regions as Gore, though it's possible that "Big River" tipped to Bush.)
What does this have to do with winning House seats? Read on.
If you assign House districts to the ten regions according to which region the majority of the district's population lives in, you find that the five regions carried by Gore contain 218 House districts; in the five regions carried by Bush there are 217. Following the 2002 election, Democrats controlled 141 of the 218 districts in Gore regions, while Republicans controlled 152 of the 217 seats in Bush regions:
Region: D-R
Upper Coasts: 35-5
Northeast Corridor: 30-13
El Norte: 37-19
Great Lakes: 20-19
Big River: 19-21
Southern Lowlands: 20-25
Southern Comfort: 16-28
Appalachia: 12-31
Sagebrush: 9-35
Farm Belt: 8-33
This ranking runs from the region with the most lopsided Democratic delegation (Upper Coasts) to the region with the heaviest Republican representation (the Farm Belt).
The problem, when you dig deeper, seems to be that Democrats are trying too hard to pick up seats in the regions where Republican House members are strongest, and not doing enough to increase their margin in the places where Democratic House members do best.
The Farm Belt includes allegedly "perennially endangered" Republicans like Anne Northup of Kentucky and Jon Hostettler of Indiana the Democrats have been unable to knock off after three straight election cycles. After targeting these districts and others in the region--and losing--it is a wonder that after 2004 Democrats have actually managed to keep the Republicans at a standstill: while we've lost Baron Hill's district in Indiana, Stephanie Herseth picked up Janklow's district in South Dakota; and we've flipped districts in Kentucky, losing Ken Lucas' seat but gaining Ernie Fletcher's.
If we keep on trying to win seats in the Farm Belt, we're going to keep on wasting resources and effort on contesting the Republicans' turf when we should be playing offense in regions that are much friendlier for Democrats.
I posted these thoughts on my blog earlier today; now, re-reading my arguments, I find myself wondering if maybe the Democratic party should be boosting more "Upper Coasts" candidates like John Kerry on the Congressional level while fielding more "Farm Belt" candidates in national races.
The DCCC apparently tried this in Seattle, going without success for the district being vacated by Jennifer Dunn. Other U.C. districts we should be fighting for include Rep. Sue Kelly's upstate New York district. Notably, Rep. Kelly is so wary of her party that neither her Congressional homepage nor her official biography mentions the word "Republican." Another New York Republican, John Sweeney ought to have faced a much tougher contest. Two other Republicans who deserve targeting again are Nancy Johnson and Rob Simmons of Connecticut.
Similarly, the Northeast Corridor includes Republicans like Chris Shays, Jim Greenwood, and Michael Castle. While another Republican replaced Greenwood in this year's election, Ginny Schrader made it a tougher race and the district is likely to remain on the Dems' target list whether anyone follows my advice or not.
I could continue down the line, but I won't, aside from noting that Democrats did flip a couple of districts in the Great Lakes region--Phil Crane's and retiring Jack Quinn's.
And I'll end by noting that in the five Gore regions, no Democratic seats switched hands.
For a complete list of Republican-held seats in the Gore regions check here.