Every ten years, the nation performs a census. Those results are then used to redraw Congressional districts all over the country. It is, therefore, important that Republicans have some say over how those new districts get drawn. Thus, the over-reach of Obama/Pelosi/Reid could not have happened at a better time, as Americans are now turning back to Republican governors just in time for redistricting.
As the country currently stands, there are 26 Democratic governors and 24 Republican governors. Thirty-seven of these will be on the ballot in 2010. Of those, 19 are held by Democrats and 18 are held by Republicans. A surprising 23 of these races are open races, with no incumbent.
Current projections have the Republicans likely to pick up governorships in (1) Colorado, (2) Illinois, (3) Iowa, (4) Kansas, (5) Maine, (6) New Mexico, (7) Ohio, (8) Oklahoma, (9) Tennessee, (10) Pennsylvania, and (11) Wyoming. They also have good shots at getting Wisconsin and Michigan.
Democrats are likely to pick up governorships in (1) California, (2) Connecticut, (3) Hawaii, (4) Minnesota, and (5) Rhode Island.
If this happens as expected, then Republicans will control 30 governorships, with the possibility of two more. The Democrats will control the other 20.
More importantly, those 30 governorships preside over a total of 243 Congressional seats (out of 435). This is 56% of the total number of districts. Also, if the Republicans capture Wisconsin and Michigan, then this number increases to 265 (61% of the total). AND, if the Republicans keep California, which also is very possible, then they will control the redistricting on as many as 318 seats (73% of the total).
This doesn’t mean that the Republicans can do whatever they want because legislatures are involved in this process as well. And right now, the Democrats control the legislatures of 27 states, with the Republicans controlling 14, and the rest being split. But at a minimum, this gives the Republicans the power to block any attempts by the Democrats to redraw these districts to be more favorable to them.
Moreover, if state legislatures go the same way, then Republicans may indeed receive a golden opportunity to improve the chances of returning Republican majorities to the Congress in future through careful redistricting.
And even leaving redistricting aside, the more Republicans we have in governors mansions, the greater the chances we have of finding good candidates to compete in 2012 and beyond. Governors not only help highlight Republican policies at the state level, but they act as the farm team for national politics.
No matter how you cut this, this is good news.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
Good News On The Governor Front
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
28 comments:
"Farm team" - I love it, Andrew!
This is very good news, indeed.
They've been talking about Laffer's article in the WSJ earlier this week, and the concern that the economy is going to take a huge dive come January and the tax hikes; followed by the Republicans taking the blame for it. :( Maybe it won't matter so much is we have a good say over redistricting. Yay.
Thanks Crispy, I thought farm team seemed appropriate!
That's always possible about a recession. But I think that the economy is likely to start its dive before the election.
In any event, I think people look to Washington, not the states anymore for economic matters. So I'm not worried about the governors. I would be more worried about a Republican Congress. They need to figure out fast how to stimulate the economy -- which they can find at this site.
That is good news, Andrew.
What I am wondering is how much do the Republicans get?
I am sure that the MSM is in a panic as well. They are spinning, especially when Obama offers to give money to Hamas.
I love that you're always willing to lead the way and educate everyone, including Congress! Keep up the good work, Andrew!
Joel, I don't know how much the Republicans will get. I'm hoping that something even more optimistic happens -- that the Democrats stay home in large numbers around the country, and we get even more than the polls suggest. But we won't know until November -- though there signs that is happening.
You're right about the spinning. They are busy trying to save Obama's failing presidency right now, just like they spent the first part of the year trying to save the Democrats in Congress -- which doesn't appear to be working.
Frankly, I'm surprised he didn't try to give to Hezbollah and Al Qaeda as well.
Crispy, We are more than happy to provide lessons to Congress, and we won't even charge them!* ;-)
* Just $2.4 trillion shipping and handling.
As much as a zero as Meg Whitman is, do you really think that light-loafer Jerry Brown will become California governor again after the dramatic failures of his last term?
That would be depressing.
LL,
As of today, Meg is one point behind Moonbeam. He has tremendous baggage he HAS to overcome.
My mom used to tell of Brown calling all heads of departments late in the day to the Capitol, then he wouldn't show up. Made for some really bad blood. I am surprised he has gotten this far.
LL, The polls currently say its close, but I actually have a hard time seeing Jerry Brown winning.
On the one hand, I think his time has past and that Californians are unlikely to accept his far-left, insane approach to leadership.
Plus, Whitman seems rather moderate/center left/right, which is what Californians seem to keep picking for their governors lately. In fact, I would describe her as Schwarzenegger in drag.
I think the reason the polls are this close is that the Republicans just had a nasty-ish primary and their support isn't unified yet in the polls, whereas the Democrats didn't face that. I would look for a shift toward Whitman to start in a few weeks.
Until then though, I have to go with the polls.
Joel, I haven't lived in California, but from what I've heard, Brown earned his nickname "Governor Moonbeam."
I suspect he made it this far because I think the other Democratic candidates kept falling apart, leaving him as kind of the last lunatic standing.
Andrew - he was Governor Moonbeam in his forties. He's seventy-two now, so Governor Moonbat might be the moniker he's be given this time. He has VAST baggage.
Meg Whitman is no prize, but she's better than Brown. I think she'll end up being left of Schwarzenegger to spite her rhetoric, but way right of Moonbat Jerry Brown.
We'll see. California has a very rocky future no matter who occupies the governor's mansion.
LL, If any state needed to start fresh, it's California. Everything I've seen about California is just a mess. So I think you're right that no matter who wins, things will not go well.
I'm honestly a little surprised that Obama and the Democrats never bailed California out? It's become the flagship of liberalism run amok and it's sinking fast. Sounds like something they would dearly want to protect with everyone else's tax dollars.
Whether Whitman is further to the left of Schwarzenegger, I will defer to you as I don't know enough about Arnold to be sure how far left he is -- he seems pretty far left from Colorado! I do know though that Whitman has said some things that just startled me in their stupidity and their leftwardness. So you are probably right.
I'm just hoping she ends up being good for redistricting. That's the one thing she could do that would help out nationally.
"Governors not only help highlight Republican policies at the state level, but they act as the farm team for national politics."
this is begging for a giant foam "we're #1!" finger!
Patti, LOL! Yes it does! And one of those obnoxious horns that makes you deaf!
Andrew and LL: The governor's race here in California will be a tight one. I voted for Whitman's major opponent, but I don't feel any sense of loss in her winning the nomination. I'll be discussing a few of the weird perambulations of the race in tomorrow afternoon's post. I want to see another R in the governors' caucus tally, but I'm still wondering who the real Meg Whitman is. She's no conservative by most accounts, but she doesn't appear to be a RINO, either. She's definitely electable.
This is good news. Are you still going to talk about Senate and House races? I saw that Angle isn't doing nearly as badly as everyone claimed she would.
Lawhawk, I think she's electable, barring some major mistake. I think the Democrats made a huge mistake in picking Gov. Moonbeam. Right now the polls have her behind, but like I say above, I see that changing over the next few days and weeks.
In fact, a lot will change across the country as the primaries finally result in candidates.
Mega, Yes, I plan to do a new article soon about the various Senate and House races going on. I've just been waiting for some of the big primaries to end (which they just did) so that we have a better idea of who is facing whom.
All in all, I think we can't win the Senate anymore, but things are going well with the House and in the states. And I suspect that we'll get the Senate next time when more Democrats are up for re-election.
We got you covered! :-)
I hope your right. I want to see as many R's as I can get. The D's had their chances and D is for DUMB.
I hope so too Ed. I'd love to see us with all 50 governorships, but I can't see that happening.
P.S. Don't forget that "D" is also for "Depression" and "Disaster."
If Republicans recruit good conservative candidates, we will obliterate the dems in November…yeah! I know there are exceptions like CA, Meg Whitman is electable.
That’s good news with the governorships, as many “R’s as possible.
Stan, I agree. And that seems to be the case right now, with all the RINOs being obliterated in the primaries and solid conservatives moving on to the fall elections.
I think it can't be underestimated how important the timing on this is. If last election had been the 2010 election, we would be facing total disaster right now in terms of redistricting. As it is, Obama/Pelosi may be about to hand us a fantastic gift that pays off for the next decade or two.
Good Post and GREAT picture of the original Gerrymander.
p.s. as an aside, the word verification came up a slightly altered spelling of the classic Noonan" from Caddyshack! l.o.l.
Thanks Jed! Yeah, I figured the Gerrymander was appropriate for this post.
That's funny about "noonan." I have friends who used to use that relentlessly.
Commentarama needs to take a look at Alvin Greene, the new political phenomenon from South Carolina. I posited that he may be the new Democratic hope. (no I don't really think he can unseat Jim DeMint). But it's one of those fun things in politics these days.
LL, I saw your article today at your place, very nice. The guy really is. . . uh. . . stunning?
We probably should take a look at him, especially since it's probably going to be entertaining watching the Democrats implode on this.
Um Andrew.....
You did not cover the other seven Obama states.
Did you forget we added seven new ones. Well I guess they are easy to forget since they don't show up on the map.
Individualist, I thought about that the whole time, trust me! In fact every time I wrote 50, I thought about adding "or is that 57?" LOL!
Post a Comment