In my Business Journal column today, I write about Jay Nixon's opportunity cost of winning by 19 points. He could have used more of his campaign resources - both time and money - to help down ballot House and Senate candidates win. He would have won by less, but he'd be in true possession of a mandate now.
In the end, Nixon reportedly spent about $200,000 on House candidates. If he'd been willing to invest $1 million, November 4 would have looked much different,
In the aftermath of the elections earlier this month, Missouri Republicans and Democrats have emerged with very different mindsets.
Democrats have become obsessive about former governor Bob Holden.Within every excited paragraph they speak about the prospects of incoming governor, Jay Nixon, there’s a fearful sentence in which Holden’s name comes up.They see parallels between the two administrations and can’t help but worry that Nixon has been dealt a bummer hand.
Republicans love this. They too imagine Nixon as a reincarnation of Holden. If Holden is a ghost that haunts Democrats, Republicans are melting their gold to build a statue to him. To them, Nixon’s taking office with a crumbling budget situation and a boatload of promises smells like deliverance in 2010 and 2012. As a result, Republicans, despite having just been thumped with a 19 point loss in the governor’s race and lost four of the five state-wide contests, are blasé if not upbeat.
The Democratic approach is ultimately healthier for their prospects.
For starters, by obsessing about Holden, Jay Nixon and the Democrats are certain to avoid making his mistakes. No doubt they’ll make entirely new ones.But Nixon won’t end up looking like Holden – weak, and ineffectual.A safer bet would be for Nixon to make a series of courageous and bold mistakes.
Secondly, the economic environment will define Nixon’s tenure differently. This climate is so catastrophic that he will reap the benefit of doubt when tough decisions have to be made. And it may also result in some relief from the federal government.
Republicans, on the other hand, could use a little paranoia. They’ve mentally compartmentalized each of their state-wide losses with unique narratives to avoid feeling that the election signified a shift in the electorate. Instead of dwelling on those defeats, they point to a stunning gain of three seats in the Senate and a better-than-expected loss of only three seats in the House. They see these as evidence that their governing philosophy is still in tune with the wishes of the majority of Missourians.
As a result they’re spending energy elbowing each other. Lieutenant Governor Peter Kinder and Senator Kit Bond are tussling over the party apparatus. Kinder wants it for his 2012 gubernatorial run; Bond wants it for his 2010 senate re-election. Meanwhile, there is plenty of snipping at Kinder’s political guru, David Barklage, by the other Republican consultants who wish to block his ascent to reigning consultant-king.
This political rugby is preventing the deeper discussion Republicans should be having about the dismal outcome of the last election.
First, the governor’s race is where the electorate most clearly transmits its political feelings. State House and Senate races can be influenced by small factors like constituent services, hard-working candidates, savvy mail programs. The governor’s race is decided by big factors like political ideology. To lose that race by an astounding 19 points should, alone, be cause for deep self-reflection.
Second, Republicans were swept on the three open state-wide seats. Their lone state-wide victory can be explained most easily by the value of incumbency.
Democrats took their 2004 loss to heart.They endeavored to increase their appeal to rural Missouri; they started recruiting differently in local elections; they gave some attention to ballot initiatives to help turn-out; the Democratic donor base closed ranks behind a gubernatorial candidate early to avoid a primary.Their honest assessment of losses in 2004 started laying the groundwork for Claire McCaskill’s 2006 win and for Election Night earlier this month.
Republicans biggest problem right now is their complacency and lack of introspection.
The bulwark consists of control of secretary of state offices in five key states — Iowa, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico and Ohio — where the difference between victory and defeat in the 2004 presidential election was no more than 120,000 votes in any one of them.
With a Democrat now in charge of the offices, which oversee and administer their state’s elections, the party is better positioned than in the previous elections to advance traditional Democratic interests —such as increasing voter registration and boosting turnout — rather than Republican priorities such as stamping out voter fraud.
Perhaps more important, in those five states Democrats are now in a more advantageous position when it comes to the interpretation and administration of election law — a development that could benefit Barack Obama if any of those states are closely contested on Election Day.
The effort began in 2006 when a group of liberal California activists created an independent 527 group designed to elect secretaries of state.
The Secretary of State Project ran independent ads of its own and ensured that donors — many of whom were affiliated with Democracy Alliance, a network of wealthy fundraisers that channels money to liberal causes across the country — knew which candidates deserved donations.
The initiative is titled "The Schools First: Elementary and Secondary Education Funding Initiative."
"I think the Secretary of State did a great job of summarizing this measure," says "Yes on A" attorney Chuck Hatfield. "It's very clear what it deals with. It clearly discusses the changes that will be made to the gambling law and it clearly discusses the in excess of $100 million that will be raised for education. I'm not sure what more the Secretary of State could have done."
But Missouri State Representative Ray Salva of Kansas City say the Secretary of State approved ballot language that is not true and not accurate, focusing voters' attention on the funding benefits and not the gaming changes.
"There is no money here for education," says Rep. Salva, D-Sugar Creek. "This is about casinos, casinos, casinos. Instead of schools first, it should be casinos first, schools last and that's what this is about."
Opponents of Proposition A and it's ballot wording also believe the fiscal note prepared by the state auditor over-estimates how much money would be raised for schools.
Salva points the finger at the Missouri Gaming Commission who he says twisted the numbers when giving them to the state auditor, which in turn, misled both the attorney general's office and the secretary of state.
Judge Callahan plans to make a final ruling on the ballot wording issue Friday.
Malan, a retired architect, writes that he "believes who we elect is not as important as what we do in our cities, states and nation, and that the key ingredient needed to tug our political decision-making system into the 21st Century is a convenient but controlled way for We The People to modify or override most legislative decisions. To test this idea, if elected, Malan proposes to announce how he plans to vote on most major bills. But if enough constituents disagree by the time a bill reaches its final vote, Malan says he will vote the people's way."
The Secretary of State has certified the results of the recount and the outcome is the same. I have called Chris Koster and congratulated him. Although we all would have liked a different ending to this story, I am proud of the campaign that we ran and the doors that we opened.
The friendship and support you have shown me over the past year have been at times overwhelming. During these past weeks of the recount, I continued to be humbled and gratified by the sacrifices made by so many in order to help.
I will now focus my efforts on making sure that Democrats from Barack Obama down to legislative candidates are elected. This is a critical election and I hope you will join me in doing everything we can to insure that we put Democrats in those positions.
I will never forget all of your many kindnesses and your efforts on behalf of my campaign.
Donnelly to Supporters: Outspent, Stalking Horse and Weighing Next Steps
Election day has come and gone and our historic race has made history once again: we ended with the closest statewide vote total in Missouri history- 786 votes. It is an amazing result when you consider that Koster spent 3 times as much money on TV as I did in the last week of the campaign and that we had a “stalking horse” candidate who received 23,000 votes after not campaigning at all.
I cannot begin to express my thanks to all of you. You gave so generously of your time and money to help the campaign. I am very proud of the race we ran and without you we would never have done so well.
Under Missouri law we are entitled to a recount if the vote total is less than 1%. Even though the state pays the cost of the official recount we would still have some expenses if the recount proceeds. We are weighing the costs and practical considerations before deciding the next step to take. The recount cannot begin until the vote totals are certified, approximately 2 weeks after the election.
I will keep you posted on what we decide to do about the recount. Meanwhile, we can look ahead to the November elections and electing Democrats from the president down to the legislative seats.
Missourians United for Life is a new pro-life group that its founders hope will be a big player in Missouri politics over the next few years. Yesterday two things happened that brought it to my attention. First, in Shamed Dogan’s (88-RD GOP primary) TV ad, when he talks about being pro-life, the screen displays a “endorsed by Missourians United for Life.” And second there was a hard-hitting mail piece that arrived to voters in the 31st Senate District that was produced by MUL.
The two key people at the center of MUL are former Blunt chief of staff Ed Martin and Jim LePage, who some may remember ran as a pro-life Democrat in the gubernatorial primary of 2004.
According to MO Ethics reports they spent $6,664 on the mail piece which opposed Rep. David Pearce in his senatorial primary against Rex Rector. Their foray was said to be prompted by donations of $25,000 from the Stowers Institute to Pearce. And the piece does take aim at Pearce’s support for stem-cell research
So far MUL’s entire funding consists of a $700 contribution from Martin and a $7,000 contribution from Common Sense Leaders of Missouri.That committee in turn has been funded by 106th Legislative Committee ($7,025) and Missouri Limestone Producers Association Legislative Fund ($10,000).
A spokesperson for Stacey Newman's campaign called and reasserted arguments from comments section of the last post (JR's) that the words "Eastern Region" on Brown's business card undermines his claim to have been a Deputy Chief Counsel. That's a retreat from their mailed lit piece which said Brown gave himself the title. However, the promotion memo again supports Brown's resume as it simply states Deputy Chief Counsel.
Newman's campaign, by the way, says that their erroneous information came by calling the local district office, where they spoke to an unidentified woman, "whoever answered the phone."
