Are the Democrats dead? Do the math.
This article was originally on a blog post platform and may be missing photos, graphics or links. See About archive blog posts.
President Obama ran in 2008 with a call for change, but the news that top Democrats would rather give up their seats than seek reelection has touched off a flurry of worry about the party’s ability to govern in this year of congressional elections and potential party realignment.
Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.) will announce this morning that he is retiring rather than seek a sixth term in the Senate. This follows the news within just 24 hours that Sen. Byron Dorgan of North Dakota as well as Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter will also leave the political arena. Just as significantly, a number of representatives, both Democrats and even more Republicans, have announced they too will step down.
Democrats will take comfort that Dodd, gravely wounded with voters by getting a mortgage at a favorable rate, will be replaced by a stronger party candidate in a state where Democrats usually win.
Still, with Obama’s approval rating below 50% in many polls, a continuing unhappiness of the slow economic recovery and the worry about jobs and at least two ongoing wars, political observers have been predicting a tough year for Democrats. This is the election in a census year, as well, so winners will control how the new congressional districts will carved up, a crucial but seldom watched process.
The biggest immediate question is, can Democrats hold the Senate and what about the much vaunted 60-member supermajority that the party has claimed? Democrats will probably lose that magic number, but will likely keep a majority overall.
By most counts, the GOP has a shot in more than a dozen states including Arkansas, Colorado, Nevada, North Dakota and Pennsylvania, where newly minted Democrat Arlen Spector will have problems from both his old and new affiliations. There are also three tough races involving seats held by appointees, including Sens. Ted Kaufman of Delaware and Roland Burris of Illinois -- neither of whom are running. The third appointee, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, is seeking election, but her situation remains tough given a host of state political woes and her more conservative politics than much of the rest of her party.
And of course, there is Massachusetts and its special election to fill Ted Kennedy’s seat in just weeks.
So how important is the number 60? Without it, there probably would be no health insurance overhaul legislation winding its way through the political infighting, many centrists argue. Even with 60, the final product is far from the robust healthcare reform the country needs, liberals retort.
What of future issues? Climate change and immigration reform were the major topics on the agenda this year, but they were going to be slog no matter what in this election year. And the issues of war in Iraq, Afghanistan and on terrorists will not become less polarized as the year goes on.
With less than a filibuster-proof majority expected after the elections, Democrats would give Republicans an opening to again be in play. If the GOP can hang together, it could create deadlock in lieu of their frequent angry outbursts that they are being ignored.
-- Michael Muskal
twitter.com/LATimesmuskal
