State Legislatures

My central insight in my recent disagreement with Patrick is that the creativity will take place in the states. While there will be some very important fights in Washington over the next 2-4 years, in particular health care, card check, and bailouts, another equally important fight will happen in 40 or more states over that time period. In the federal fights, our answer is likely to be simply: NO.

But at the states, something else will happen. Check out this map (click for a larger version), courtesy of the New York Times, via The Big Picture:

Our states -- and our municipalities -- are in fiscal crisis. They have gotten drunk on revenue from a credit bubble. As the economy deleverages to something sane, state and local revenue is, or has already, collapsed. Education budgets based on property taxes will develop massive holes when assessments reflect 40% drops in housing prices. Examples, from the NYT story above, of how bad it is:

In Michigan, to reduce overtime costs, fewer streets will be salted this winter. In Ohio, where the unemployment rate is above 7 percent, the state may need a federal loan for the first time in 26 years to cover unemployment costs. In Nevada, which is almost totally dependent on sales taxes and gamblingrevenues, a health administrator said the state may be unable to pay claims in a few months.

So we are going to need to cut spending and/or raise taxes to pay for some of these services. We are probably going to end up fighting over taxes. I searched Google News for "state tax increases" and came up with the following headlines from the last 24 hours:

• Milwaukee, WI: Most state residents don't favor business tax increases, poll finds
• Alexandria, MN: Local proposed tax levies higher than state average
• North Mankato, MN: Tax increases for North Mankato
• Johnson County, KS: Readers write about Johnson County tax increases
• Utah: Utah gas tax increase in the pipeline?
• Florida: Budget blues lead lawmakers to eye raising cigarrette taxes
• Cortlandt, NY: Cortlandt cuts costs to reduce tax increases
• Phoenix, AZ: State's drop in tax collections spurs concerns
• Kingston, NH: Kingston residents suprised over property tax hike
• Stafford, NH: Stafford tax rate to increase 76 cents

And, of course, the government employees unions, with their unsustainable pensions on the model of GM and Ford, are shaking the cup for their local and state tax increases too, as I have pointed out before.

There are opportunities here for Republicans to fix the brand. We can demand no tax increases. Perhaps more importantly, we can demand cost-saving reforms in government services. The leaders and winners of these fights will be the ones who will have earned their place as party leaders in the future.

Once again, the salvation for our party and our future leaders doesn't reside in Washington. The real action will be in the state capitals.  Outside of stopping some bailouts, the real action will reside there.

So let's stop talking about Washington and figure out how to play in these states, state by state, municipality by municipality.

The trial of Sen. Ted Stevens is almost over, with the case now in the hands of the jury. The trial hasn't been free of drama: the prosecution mishandled evidence to the point where the case was almost dismissed, and eleven of the jurors asked the judge to kick off the twelfth for "violent outbursts." Today, the judge replaced one of the jurors whose father passed away with an alternate. With nine days to go until election day, the verdict will with all likelihood be handed down before the weekend.

When the indictment of Stevens came down, my initial reaction was that Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich would be the next United States Senator from the Last Frontier. But after the initial earthquake, the aftershock worked in Stevens' favor. Alaskans learned more details about the indictment, which essentially came down to "purposefully" leaving certain things off of his Senate financial disclosure forms, a charge where the motive is very hard to prove. I was shocked that this is all that the government had on him. It also didn't help that Begich himself essentially committed the same "crime" and "plead guilty" by paying a $1,420 fine to the Alaska Public Offices Commission, the state's financial disclosure watchdog agency. With an initial 13 point deficit immediately after the indictment, undecided Alaskans rallied around Stevens before and during the trial. His campaign rans some very good ads, and he is now anywhere between up 2 point to down 2 points in various polls: for all intents and purposes, a tie.

Bottom line: acquittal for Stevens = big win for Stevens, conviction for Stevens = big win for Begich. I know there are a lot of conservatives who read and write on this blog that aren't fans of Stevens, and I understand. (I've promised some people a piece on why I still support Ted, and that should be coming soon.) But it's been a weird past few months for Alaska from this trial to McCain's selection of Sarah Palin. Let's take a look and the stakeholders affected from the eventual verdict of this trial.

Senate Filibuster

Let's assume that Joe Lieberman and Bernie Sanders are in the Democratic caucus, and make the count from 51. Shaheen def. Sununu (NH), Warner def. Gilmore (VA), Merkley def. Smith (OR), Udall def. Schaffer (CO), Udall def. Pearce (NM), Franken def. Coleman (MN), Hagan def. Dole (NC), Musgrove def. Wicker (MS), Lunsford def. McConnell (KY), and Martin def. Chambliss (GA). That makes it 61. The likelihood of those last two races (KY and GA) going blue are slim but possible. So let's make it 59.

Political junkies might be staying up through the night to watch Alaska's Senate race, and I doubt that the average juror even knows what a filibuster is.

The Campaign of Mark Begich

The Stevens campaign's strategy is clear if he's acquitted: continue their message of his long list of contributions to the state. On the other hand, Mark Begich has to be the most frustrated Congressional candidate in the country. First, the selection of Gov. Palin to the national ticket is limiting the precious amount of free media he was used to getting as Mayor. Second, without the indictments, Begich was probably the favorite to win the election (but not the clear favorite) because of what the "ethical cloud" over Stevens. With that cloud maybe clearing a few days before the election, Begich faces a big loss if Stevens is cleared of all charges.

Third, and most importantly, any strategy Begich runs is a lose-lose scenario. After the indictments came down, Begich couldn't slap Stevens around because of the overwhelming support Ted got after the indictments. The DSCC took on that role with a series of ads and mailers that have gained no traction whatsoever. Plus, the Alaska Republican Party is running their own offense against Begich, running ads about his own financial problems. Begich also can't just run an "issue-based" campaign as he promised. So just a few days ago, Begich decided to switch gears and start attacking Stevens, which signals that Begich is gambling. Even if Stevens is acquitted, Begich is trying to keep the "cloud" over Stevens. But the fact is that if the acquittal comes, Begich is done.

The AK-AL House Race

It looks as if Don Young is making another comeback. Down double-digits earlier this fall to former State House minority leader, Ethan Berkowitz, the latest polls have him anywhere between 5 to 8 points down. Berkowitz has the same problem as Begich: no free media coverage of his issues. Rural Alaska will hold strong for both Stevens and Young; the question is how much the potential acquittal of Stevens will hold off swing voters in urban Alaska (Anchorage and Fairbanks) from going Berkowitz's way. I still give the advantage to Berkowitz because Young used all of his money against Sean Parnell in the Republican primary. But a Steven acquittal could put him over the top if Young keeps up this momentum.

The Alaska State Legislature

The State Senate is holding at 11 Republicans to 9 Democrats, although the 6 of the Republicans joined the 9 Democrats to form a bipartisan coalition. In all likelihood, this number holds, although there are open Reublican seats in Fairbanks where Republican Cynthia Henry (a former staffer for Ted Stevens) has the advantage over Democrat Joe Paskvan, and in Anchorage where current Republican State Representative Kevin Meyer has the advantage over former Anchorage city councilman Doug Van Etten.

There is no doubt that Palin being at the top of the ticket has helped. McCain went from a shaky single digit lead in Alaska to a healthy double digit lead. The same can be said in the State House, where Republicans have a 23 to 17 advantage. There are about 6 Republican seats and 2 Democratic seats that are in some danger of switching over. The probability is that Democrats will only pick up one or maybe two of the Republican seats. The problem is that there are enough RINOs in the State House that would create a coalition with the Democrats if the Republican advantage was eroded to 21 to 19. A Stevens acquittal would secure a healthy Republican majority. A Stevens conviction will probably mean a State House coalition, or maybe even an outright Democratic majority.

How does this change the political landscape of Alaska? Let's take a look at the difference. Stevens acquittal = Stevens in the Senate, possibly Young staying in the House, and Republican majorities in the state legislature. Stevens conviction = Begich and Berkowitz in the Senate and House, along with at least Democratic-controlled coalitions in the state legislature. Add this to liberal majorities in many city councils across Alaska, Democrats have fertile ground from which to build a blue farm team in a red state.

Never before have 12 people who are not registered voters in the State of Alaska have had so much influence in Alaska, and possibly the potential rubber-stamping of a liberal agenda from the Hill.

Today, David Brooks gave praise to Reihan Salam's and Ross Douthat's new book, Grand New Party, in an op-ed entited "The Sam's Club Agenda". (Two days ago, Patrick Ruffini posted and encouraged everybody to start reading and debating.) I plan on going to the Barnes & Noble across the street from where I work today to buy it.

While I haven't read the book yet, Brooks made an interesting observation on Salam and Douthat's vision: "This is not compassionate conservatism (which flattered the mind of the compassionate donor), it’s hard-work conservatism, which uses government to increase the odds that self-discipline and effort will pay off."

Bottom line up front: all politics still seems to be local. While the federal government is involved in a lot of bread-and-butter economic issues for the middle class, voters obvioulsy feel very removed from what goes on inside the Beltway; yet, a larger amonut of folks pay attention to local and state issues, partly because you are more likely to have a connection and conversation on a first name basis with your city councilman or state representative than you are with your senior U.S. senator. (An unrelated question: how has new media affected the mantra that all politics is local?)

Major league/professional sports teams have "farm team" systems where they can identify and train prospects. The best franchises in baseball have fully developed minor league system: Red Sox, Yankees, Angels, etc. The NBA only recently saw the usefulness of having a minor league system with the NBDL. Here's an observational question (and I look forward to responses/disagreements/debate on this): Do the Democrats today have a better "farm team" system than the Republicans? My answer would be yes, because not only have liberal/left-leaning organizations and the DNC have been involved in identifying and training politicians and aspiring politicians at the local and state level; they have supported these candidates using Web2.0 tools like ActBlue.

[I also bring this up in light of a report that was released by House Republicans responding to why they just lost some special Congressional elections. The report apparently states that: "None of the candidates nor their allies successfully established themselves and their local brand in contrast to the negative perception of the national GOP."]

Now the real question: What can the next Republican Party do to develop our "farm team" system? The point here is that a lot of the middle class economic issues are problems that can be solved with conservative principles and policies at the local and state level: property/sales/severance taxes, transparency in budgeting, taxpayer-backed bonds, and accountability in education. And while we on the right like delegating power to state and local leaders on legitimate state and local issues, I believe that any national center-right organization and the next Republican Party need to have much closer coordination with state parties, local leaders, and potential local leaders to both identify (in the long term) those who can move up within the system and to identify (in the short term) local issues that are important to the middle class.

If we're going to have a broader Republican Party, and if we buy into Salam and Douthat's vision, developing the Republican Minor League will be just as important, if not more important, than keeping the Republican Major League in line.

- MM

(cross-posted at www.KungFuQuip.com)

Last week the Obama campaign released a list of states where it was going up with advertising - Alaska, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Indiana, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Virginia.

An odd grouping of states, no doubt.  I saw a couple of posts that could explain most of those choices, but te authors always had trouble with Alaska, North Dakota and other outliers. Most posts simply suggested this was a combination of three things; trying to expand the map, normal targeting choices, and pipe dreams.

I disagree and I'd like to propose a new theory - one that I believe explains every choice very clearly.

At about the same time this list was released, I was listening to a presentation regarding state legislative bodies and places where the partisan control of chambers was razor thin.  What surprised me was the striking similarity between the two lists.