The Vulnerable Frank Kratovil
March 1, 2009 by Cato
Filed under Democrat Campaigns, Maryland, Maryland Politics, Media, National Politics
How vulnerable is freshman Rep. Frank Kratovil (D-MD)? Not half as vulnerable as he, and his pals in the media would have you believe.
Sure, common sense dictates that Kratovil will have some tough sledding in 2010. The First District has historically gone Republican since the early 1960′s. However, less than two months into his term, Kratovil and the DCCC are doing all they can to make sure that Flip-Flop Frank will get over the hump in 2010 so that his Democrat pals in the Maryland legislature can gerrymander a nice safe seat for 2012 (and beyond).
If you follow congressional seats around the country you will quickly find that this disingenuous stab at fooling the voters isn’t limited to Maryland’s 1st congressional district. The DCCC, along with their pals in the media, are playing this game all over the country. Merely insert name of Congressman X here.
Frank Kratovil is working hard for the people of his district. He is taking THEIR concerns to Washington. Damn the national party, he’s looking out for the people back home. This is one side of the argument, as represented by an article in this mornings Daily Times.
Ironically, while driving home from picking up the Sunday papers I heard the latest incarnation of the other side of the DCCC / Kratovil / Congressman X argument:
While “principled” Democrats (meaning Democrats in GOP leaning districts) voted against the Obama / Pelosi PORKULUS bill (or in Kratovil’s case voted against it and then voted for it), those cynical, evil Republcians are voting against it only to claim that they were right if PORKULUS fails to do all that it promises.
Now, there is a touch of validity to this part of the argument. There are undoubtedly GOP members of the House and Senate who only voted against the bill because they believe it will be politically beneficial. As I have noted time and again, I hope those members (including several in the leadership) are run out of town prior to any switch to a GOP majority. In fact, at least those members in the leadership will need to go (or at least lose their leadership posts) before we will be able to win a majority. Fortunately, I do not believe (nor is there any evidence) that the majority of GOP House members voted on this bill for political expediency (the Senate may be a little more up in the air).
We need to remember that no matter how bad things get with the economy, the media will be changing their tune from:
“worst economy since the Great Depression”to either:
“Happy Days are here again”
OR
“the Obama / Democrat stimulus has turned the economy around and things are improving.
The timing on this will merely depend on when they get their cue from our great advocate of HOPE and CHANGE.
Regardless, the DCCC will be continuing some form of this little dance throughout this election cycle; and it’s a fairly intricate dance. As even Kratovil has admitted, consistenly voting against the radically left wing leadership of his own caucus could lead to punishment. This was one of the reasons he gave for his flip-flop on the PORKULUS bill. While they realize that they have to get through re-districting in order to assure a more permanent Democrat majority, the Pelosi crowd wants to start raising the hammer and sickle above the Capitol now.
Frankly, I’m a little surprised. The Democrat leadership should know that Frank Kratovil will carry all the water they want him to – after they get him a safe seat. Frank Kratovil isn’t a liberal, he isn’t even a moderate (unless you use my definition – “one who beleives in nothing”). Frank Kratovil is an opportunist. So, expect Flip-Flop Frank to insert the terms “Blue Dog” and “fiscally responsible” at least a dozen times into any interview he gives between now and November, 2010.
With all due respect, you all bit yourselves in the ass by supporting an arch-conservative ideologue challenger (Harris) over a more moderate, but still reliably conservative, pragmatist incumbent (Gilchrest) in the last election. Gilchrest would likely have beaten Kratovil handily, despite the strong democratic winds of ’08. You’d still have the seat, though perhaps with a congressman less conservative than you might personally prefer . . .
Beyond that, the redistricting about which you complain is the perennial exercise of every congressional majority. I didn’t hear you complaining about it when the Republicans were doing it. But partisan complaints from the minority concerning activities in which they themselves engaged when they were in the majority are pretty common fare in the political realm . . .
And so the pendulum swings . . .
Just thought I’d splash a little objectivity upon your continuing red parade . . .
C’mon now. You know Gilchrest would not have campaigned for Kratovil had he been the Republican nominee in the 2008 general election. To suggest so is a tad disingenuous.
I stand correct as to re-districting. I guess I misperceived Congress’s role, perhaps due to Tom Delay’s involvement in Texas during the early part of this decade.
Does the role of politics in legislative redistricting bother you regardless of party? If so, do you favor such work being done by independent bipartisan commissions? Just wondering.
corrected, I mean
Had Gilchrest won the GOP primary, my contention is that Kratovil would have ran to Wayne’s right in an attempt to win and Frank would have tried to make Gilchrest = Bush.
We also forget that Harris only lost by a small percentage in a year where Obama brought out a heavier minority vote than usual and there was a Libertarian in the race to siphon off a few conservative votes.
In 2010, much will depend on how First District voters perceive progress on the economy. The GOP will also have a record to show voters where they did not in 2008, and certainly flipping on the “stimulus” will be prominent.
In the future, what may happen to the First District would be to reunite the Eastern Shore and southern Maryland because that would help Democrat chances, while the Sixth District may basically take in the entire northern border of the state. The reason Maryland was set up as it is was to pack all the Republican voters into as few districts as possible and this could make the state a 7-1 split in the future regardless of who wins in 2010.
I don’t think Kratovil would’ve run to Gilchrest’s right. Not enough substantive difference there to make it credible. Kratovil would’ve run on the mantle of change, riding Obama’s coattails and, as you noted, equating Gilchrest with Bush. But he would’ve still run as a centrist/moderate. Have to as a Democrat in the 1st. No way around that . . .
From an objective standpoint, I think the Republicans can do better than Harris. He may meet certain standards of ideological purity, but, from a packaging standpoint, he comes off, in my estimation, as an arrogant dork, which hurt him on the Shore (though not across the bay). His debate performance at Salisbury was abysmal. Yeah, he may have only lost by a small percentage, but he lost the Shore in counties where McCain won handily. Again, objectively, someone like, perhaps, Lowell Stoltzfus, would be a far better pick, but his challenge would be performing in the Western Shore counties . . .
2010 will be interesting. Time will tell . . .
Reasonable disagreement noted. Enjoy the discussion. Wish more blog discussions were of this sort . . .
As you often say of Mr. Steele, Mr. Kratovil is not a believer in the ideology he professes to worship. He is not a man of middle temperament, but is simply looking to what is necessary to win the next election. This is evidenced by the fact that he hired his Campaign Director as his Chief of Staff, one doesn’t do that if one is most concerned about crafting sound public policy. Kratovil isn’t worried about sound public policy. He lacks the intellect for that fight. He IS worried about making his political overseers happy, and he does that by couching what are ultimately liberal votes in moderate-sounding language; but have no doubt, that is the language of hypocrisy, meant to placate a electorate that will surely grow increasingly queasy of his track record.
Remember, your liberal (not even moderate) incumbent couldn’t have possibly beaten Kratovil since Wayne would have been too busy campaigning for Flip-Flop Frank. Second, it’s the state legislature and not the “congressional majority” that will re-district.
You are right that the pendulum does swing.
I was kidding about Gilchrest, of course. While I believe that Republicans should almost always attempt to elect Republicans, I am never afraid of a nomination fight for the cause. Gilchrest was one such example. He has steadily moved to the left over the years and was not the “reliable vote” that you claim. While I’m pretty pissed at Arlen Specter for supporting PORKULUS, I don’t necessary advocate that he should be gotten rid of. Of course, that is up to the Republicans in Pennsylvania.
As for redistricting, I actually do favor independent commissions – if they are truly bipartisan and independent. A bill to establish such a scheme was recently introduced in Virginia and defeated by the Dems. Redistricting is obviously a political process (unless done by a commission). If compactness were the primary concern this would be great. Unfortunately, the need to create majority minority districts (of which I am a proponent) tends to reek havoc in this area more than anything else.
With the advent of computers we have come up with all kinds of bizarre configurations. I remember when Rep. Mel Watt’s (D-NC) district ran from Charlotte to Greensboro and if you shifted lanes on I-85 you left the district.
You’re right on except for the last paragraph. It is my understanding the the primary reason the Southern Maryland counties were given to Hoyer was to protect him. The rest of what you say about redistricting is correct.
I disagree with your analysis of Harris. I’ve heard several people make the claim of arrogance. However, the only specific example people can give is the SU debate. I’m the first one to admit that Andy’s performance at that debate was bad. However, I firmly believe that he is a good candidate who was a victim of the Obama perfect storm plus some poor campaign decisions.
Thanks. You may be interested in Andy Green’s piece on the Sun’s political blog. He gave a nice mention to this post (which I had cross-posted on Red Maryland and gave some great additional analysis of the redistricting issue.
Take care.