Happy spring!
… she said as she made a small snowman somewhere in the middle of the Eastern Seaboard.
Well, whether it seems like it or not, it’s definitely technically spring. Which is, like, a time for renewal or whatever.
But statehouse action is seasonless. Winter, spring, summer, or fall, all you have to do is call…
… out Republicans for doing Very Bad Things. Like a judge just did in Wisconsin.
Campaign Action
Spring BREAKING: A Wisconsin circuit court judge has ordered Gov. Scott Walker to call special elections to fill two vacant state legislative seats.
- The seats became vacant in December 2017, when Walker appointed two Republican lawmakers to his administration.
- Walker wanted to delay filling the seats until “special” elections could be held concurrent with general elections this November.
- This plan would have left voters in these state Assembly and state Senate seats unrepresented for more than a year.
Fun fact! The judge who ordered Walker to hold special elections to fill the seats before November was appointed to the bench by Walker himself in 2014.
- Walker’s refusal to hold these special elections predates an epic special election upset in Wisconsin’s SD-10 in January, but Democrats had already flipped 34 state legislative seats from red to blue at that point in the cycle—a stark fact someone as politically adept as Walker was certainly aware of.
And if you’re worried about losing special elections, what better way to prevent that than not having them at all?
Okay, so we’re going to have special elections. Can Democrats flip these seats?
- Both seats (SD-01 and AD-42) voted for Trump, 56-39 and 55-40, respectively.
- But in 2012, Romney won SD-01 only 52-47, and Obama actually won AD-42 by a 51-48 margin.
- For frame of reference, that SD-10 seat Democrats flipped in November? Trump won 55-38 there.
So yeah, no wonder Walker wasn’t eager to fill these seats in special elections.
But Wisconsin isn’t the only GOP-led state that’s balking at special elections these days.
- Florida Gov. Rick Scott is also refusing to fill two vacant legislative seats: state House District 33 and Senate District 16.
- The open Senate seat alone leaves more than half a million Floridians without representation for almost a year.
- And if you’re wondering why Scott might be afraid to hold those specials ... well, Trump won SD-16 by a 56-42 spread—in other words, the kind of turf that's been in reach for Democrats this year. (Trump carried HD-33 by a much more comfortable 69-29 margin, but Scott can’t possibly justify holding a special for one seat and not the other.)
- While we’re talking about Republicans refusing to hold special elections for fear of losing them, let’s revisit Alabama, where Republicans are upping the anti-democracy ante by basically trying to do away with ALL THE SPECIAL ELECTIONS.
- First, Republicans pushed a measure that would eliminate special elections for U.S. Senate seats; a gubernatorial appointee would instead occupy the seat until the next general election.
- Republicans also want to eliminate most special elections to fill vacant state legislative seats.
- If a vacancy occurs after the first two years of a lawmaker’s term, a special election would not be called to fill the seat. (Fun fact: state representatives and senators all serve four-year terms in Alabama.)
- Instead, the governor would appoint someone to the post until the next general election.
- This measure has passed both chambers of the legislature, but it still must be approved by a majority of the state’s voters in November as an amendment to the state Constitution.
- GOP lawmakers claim that both proposals are aimed at saving money.
Funny how Alabama Republicans didn’t care about election costs until they got their butts handed to them in one of those special elections they suddenly want to do away with.
ImPeachy Keen: A month and a half or so ago, a Republican lawmaker had a totally reasonable response to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling the GOP’s severely gerrymandered congressional maps unconstitutional: IMPEACH!
- But this wasn’t just some crazy backbencher screaming into the void; Rep. Cris Dush received tacit approval from GOP legislative leadership, and a GOP members of the U.S. House and Senate voiced their support.
- And now that a new, fairer map is definitively in place for Pennsylvania’s congressional elections this fall, Republicans are moving to make good on this impeachment threat.
- On Thursday, the chief justice of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court—notably, one of the members not targeted for impeachment, and a Republican, to boot—took the unusual step of issuing a statement denouncing the GOP’s move to impeach his fellow justices.
- Chief Justice Thomas Saylor rightly called out the threats as retaliation for the justices’ “decision in a particular case” and as “an attack upon an independent judiciary.”
Of course, we know that “attacking an independent judiciary” is something Republicans are super hot for.
- Kansas Republicans defunding the entire state court system because of a state Supreme Court ruling they didn’t like and North Carolina lawmakers mutating the entire nature of the state’s judiciary are just two examples of GOP attacks like this in other states; you can read all about them here.
Anyway, these impeachment resolutions aren’t idle saber-rattling; Pennsylvania Republicans actually have the means to make good on their threats.
- Articles of impeachment need only be passed by a majority in the state House, which Republicans have.
- And removal from the bench requires a two-thirds supermajority vote in the state Senate—which Republicans also have, thanks to the legislative gerrymandering they executed so skillfully seven years ago.
- However, the GOP supermajority in the Senate is super-thin; only one Republican need defect in the name of sound government to prevent the impeachment of these justices.
But Republicans have a secondary—or perhaps primary—motivation for ousting four Democratic state Supreme Court justices: preserving their gerrymandered state legislative majorities in 2021.
Clear as mud? I’ve got you.
- Democrats have a 5-2 majority on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, and Republicans have almost zero chance of legitimately flipping the court back to a GOP majority before 2021.
- In 2021, a commission of two Republicans, two Democrats, and a fifth member agreed upon by the other four will create new state House and Senate maps.
- If (when, let’s be real) the two Republicans and two Democrats fail to agree upon that fifth tie-breaking commisioner, the state Supreme Court steps in to select the member.
- A Democratic-majority Supreme Court is likely to select a tiebreaker who will reject any map that unfairly benefits Republicans.
- Additionally, legal challenges to the state legislative maps are normally handled by the state Supreme Court, placing another anti-GOP gerrymander trump card in Democrats’ hands.
The Democratic majority on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court thusly constitutes an existential threat to Republicans’ ill-gotten lopsided majorities in the the state legislature.
So that’s the How and a couple of Whys Republican state legislators could impeach Pennsylvania Supreme Court justices.
Will the GOP succeed in this bloodthirsty attack on the rule of law and an independent judiciary? Stay tuned!
Springtime for Hater: Last week in this space, I wrote about a GOP House candidate in Maine who blew up his chance to run unopposed by spewing garbage insults at two of the teenage survivors of the Parkland, Florida, shooting.
Sunday Worst: Republicans in Georgia are up to their vote-suppressing tricks again.
- This time, they’re pushing legislation that would force polling places in Atlanta to close at 7 PM instead of 8 PM.
- Additionally, the House version of the bill would effectively end early voting on the Sunday before the election—when many African-American churches hold “souls to the polls” events that boost turnout in those communities.
Gee, can’t imagine whose votes Republicans are trying to suppress with this bill …
Spring Forward: Iowa brings more good news for Democrats on the recruitment front.
- In 2018, Democrats are running in 23 of 25 Senate seats and in 89 of 100 House seats—94 percent of the legislative seats on the ballot in Iowa this fall.
Pretty, pretty good, right? It’s even better when compared to the past couple of cycles.
- In 2016, Democrats ran in 87 percent of seats on the ballot that year.
- In 2014, Democrats ran in just 77 percent of these seats.
… which means it’s time to check in with the Daily Kos Legislative Open Seat Tracker! Wooooo!
Now with data on 2,235 partisan seats from 17 states where candidate filing deadlines have come and gone, here’s where the parties are in terms of retirements and open seats at the statehouse level this fall.
- 204 Republicans are retiring this fall (vs. 104 Democrats)
- 35 Republicans are term-limited out (vs. 22 Democrats)
- 372 Republicans will skate into office unopposed, while 487 Democrats will do the same.
EXTREMELY FUN FACT: More Democrats are running for state legislative office this year than in any election since 1982.
That’s kind of a BFD.
Well, that’s all we have time for this week, boys and girls. Until next time, enjoy this lousy Smarch weather!
