Reps. Rob Simmons (R-CT 02), Chris Shays (R-CT 04) and Nancy Johnson (R-CT 05) have all won their Dem-leaning seats by chipping off parts of the Dem coalition. But given the poor national environment for GOPers, their Dem challengers looked well-positioned to knock them off this cycle.
-- Yet the GOP incumbents have still managed to secure endorsements from liberal interest groups. Planned Parenthood endorsed both Simmons and Johnson. The League of Conservation Voters is backing Shays and Johnson.
-- And labor is trending towards the CT GOPers. Simmons only raised $8K from labor PACs in his '02 run against Joe Courtney (D). In this year's rematch he's already raised $96K, outdistancing Courtney. And so far, Shays has raised comparable amounts from unions as his Dem opponent Diane Farrell.

That's why we lose as a movement.

I suppose it would have been too much to expect anything substantive to come out of that; after all, Shays has been one of the strongest supporters of our failed policies over there, and recently told the New York Times that we needed to "stay the course".

John over at AmericaBlog probably summed the hearings up best in his post, Oh, now Chris Shays is worried about the Iraq debacle.

It's an election year stunt for Shays because he's in trouble. So, elections do matter. But voters shouldn't be fooled by Chris Shays.

I wonder about the tone she takes, however, when discussing the position that the so-called House "moderates" currently find themselves in.

George W. Bush is coming to Bridgeport, Connecticut for one of his ridiculous dog-and-pony shows tomorrow. He's holding a forum before a select group of business leaders to shill his plan for expanded use of health savings accounts (a fun little plan based on the idea that Americans have too much health insurance).

He will not be welcomed. Except, of course, by Chris Shays, who is flying up from Washington with him and escorting him around his "hometown": "A president has a lot of places he can be, and for him to decide to come to Bridgeport is an honor to the community and a tremendous opportunity. I am looking forward to his visit."

Chris Shays' upcoming rematch with Democrat Diane Farrell has been getting a great deal of national press attention lately. In the wake of recent mentions in the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal, Time Magazine's website has jumped aboard with a profile of the race. A few excerpts:

When House Republican Chris Shays showed up last week to a meeting of the Y's Men, a group of more than 400 senior men who meet weekly in Westport, Conn., he was warmly welcomed. The man introducing Shays, who has represented this Southern Connecticut district in Congress since 1987, presented the congressman with a jacket from the group and said "We love ya, Chris." But when he stepped to the podium, Shays didn't exude the confidence of a beloved incumbent. Instead, he sounded like a man who isn't sure the goodwill he's earned over the last nearly two decades can ensure his reelection to Congress this fall.

We were told that Saddam Hussein had a large and deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction. We were told that he was allied with the al Qaeda terrorists who had taken the lives of over 3,000 Americans during the 9-11 attacks. We were told that failure to act would be a grave mistake, that we would be faced with the most dire consequences imaginable: a nuclear attack on our own shores.

We were told that we did not need the approval of the United Nations, that we could go in without help from our traditional allies in NATo, that a "coalition of the willing" composed of Great Britain, Poland, Italy, and number of nominally supportive Third World nations could carry the day.

Cross-posted from Shayswatch

Chris Shays bills himself as a "different type of Republican". Chris Shays claims to be "principled" and "independent". But Chris Shays likes his job. Chris Shays wants to keep his job. So at the end of the day, Chris Shays will say absolutely anything to get re-elected.

We've already seen that Shays, for all his feigned shock and anger at the Republican culture of corruption, was more than willing to support the ludicrously unethical arch-conservative Roy Blunt's candidacy for House Majority Leader, after Blunt hosted a pair of massive fundraisers supporting Shays' re-election.

And we know that Shays has no problem changing his story on who's fault the failed response to Hurricane Katrina was; one minute he's putting almost all the blame on the Democratic state and local officials and the next, he's moving the blame to President Bush in order to distance himself from his so-called "friend".

In his newest political ploy to save his job, Shays has endorsed Joe Lieberman. Shays claims that he's doing this because he's grateful that Lieberman has "spoken the truth" about the war in Iraq.

"The country can't stand any more lapses by him," said Representative Bennie Thompson of Mississippi, the ranking Democrat on the Committee on Homeland Security.

But Mr. Thompson's view does not appear to be widely shared on Capitol Hill. "You fire someone for two reasons: one, to punish them; or, two, they are not capable," said Representative Christopher Shays, Republican of Connecticut and a member of the Homeland Security Committee.

"Chertoff screwed up," Mr. Shays said. "His credibility has been hurt seriously. But he is capable. And Katrina not withstanding, he has done a pretty good job."

Diane Farrell is one of our top challengers in the upcoming midterm elections. After losing a close election against nine-term incumbent Chris Shays in 2004, she's back for a second run.

With over half a million in the bank so far ad the support of the DCCC, EMILY's List, and labor, she's got the guns to take the fight to the Republicans and come home a winner. In a swing district that  John Kerry carried, the political pundit class thinks that she'll give Shays his toughest fight yet and represents one of our best pick-up opportunities in the country.

Diane has consistently run against Shays' irrational, unwavering support for the disastrous war in Iraq. This morning, she challenged him to debate her on the issue this month. Below the fold is the letter she sent him this morning.

The new Quinnipiac Poll is out today, and the results are about what you might have expected. Among Connecticut residents, Senator Lieberman's popularity remains sky-high, with a 63%-25% job approval (including a ridiculous 71%-21% among Republicans). 63% of those polled believe Joe deserves to be re-elected. In a primary, 68% of registered Democrats would vote for the incumbent, while 13% would support Ned Lamont.

Those numbers look pretty bad. In fact, the poll director, Dr. Douglas Schwartz, had this to say:

Liberal Democrats unhappy with Sen. Lieberman's position on the war can't find much good news in this poll.

As a lifelong liberal Democrat, I have to disagree with the good doctor. Perhaps I'm looking at the poll through rose-colored glasses (unlikely since, let's face it, I'm hardly the biggest Nedhead on this site), but I think there's data in this poll that lays out an obvious, but fairly promising strategy for Lamont.

I only caught the very, very end of the interview. It went something like this:

The budget follows on the heels of the Budget Reconciliation Act of 2006, which created $40 billion in budget savings by reducing financial aid for students, increasing co-payments for Medicaid beneficiaries, and cutting federal support for efforts to force deadbeat parents to pay child support.

In legislative terms, this budget is a nightmare that slashes the social safety net while opening up the cupboard to Republican special interests. In political terms, it is a gift that we can use to either put a nail in the coffin of the Bush Presidency or ride to big pickups in the midterm elections.

2nd District
Joe Courtney: $175,293 ($450,893 Cash on Hand)
Rob Simmons: $267,869 ($803,371 CoH)

4th District
Diane Farrell: $269,458 ($451,959 CoH)
Chris Shays: $562,946 ($892,552 CoH)

5th District
Chris Murphy: $167,692 ($382,643 CoH)
Nancy Johnson: $304,714 ($2,183,850 CoH)

In the fourth, however, things are heating up. Chris Shays pulled in $562,945 to Diane Farrell's $269,458. That margin is large, but expected, as Shays has recently been the beneficiary of two large, leadership-led, lobbist-filled fundraisers, and the totals do not include Diane's recent fundraiser with Madeline Albright.

The big news, however, comes out in today's Stamford Advocate:

This week, the Brooks Community Newspapers profile Diane Farrell, who is running for Shays' seat this fall. Brooks Community Newspapers runs six publications across the district reaching 210,000 residents.

Diane recently concluded her second term as First Selectwoman of Westport, where she was noted for running an open, honest, responsible administration with bipartisan support.

Diane was reelected with 71% of the vote in 2001, and was succeeded by Democrat Gordon Joseloff. In 2004, she ran against Chris Shays, winning 48% of the vote in one of the closest elections in the country, and now she's back for a rematch. Virtually every pundit and election handicapper agrees that this race will be one of the most competitive in 2006, and represents one of the Democrats' best chances for a pick-up.

So what does Diane have to say?

Throughout the Bush Administration, Chris Shays has been a steady voice for the advancement of presidential powers at the expense of Congress and the rights of his constituents.

From his full-throated support for a Patriot Act that lacks necessary safeguards for civil liberties to his opposition to bipartisan investigations into a number of scandals, including the response to Hurricane Katrina, Shays has consistently backed an unchecked executive.

As has been reported before in this space, it should be no surprise to find that Shays has no problem whatsoever with President Bush's policy of conducting wiretaps on the phone calls and emails of Americans without obtaining a warrant, in violation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 and the U.S. Constitution.

At a community meeting in Greenwich this weekend, Shays expounded upon his position, revealing a truly frightening lack of concern for our civil liberties. More on the flip...

In yesterday's Hartford Courant, Washington Bureau Chief David Lightman savages Chris Shays' decision to support Roy Blunt's efforts to replace indicted Republican House Majority Leader Tom DeLay.

Lightman begins by discarding out of turn the notion that Shays (and Congresswoman Nancy Johnson, CT-05), is backing Blunt because he is the most qualified candidate.

On one level, their endorsement of the Missouri Republican could be a shrewd political move, assuring them of a seat at a Republican table where moderates often have not been welcome.

But backing Blunt opens Johnson, Shays and other Republican centrists to questions - and in some cases withering attacks - from reformers and Democrats. And should Blunt lose - a distinct possibility - the two could be more isolated.

More on the flip...

Remember when Chris Shays said this?

It took all of three days for Chris Shays to call for a return to the status quo in the GOP House leadership.