While I have no beef with Representative Walberg personally, I do disagree with his politics. I think he’s out of step with the views of mainstream America and legislates based on ideology rather than the needs of his 7th District. So it should come as no surprise that I will support any Democrat who has a shot at replacing Representative Walberg. Schauer, currently the Democratic minority leader in the Senate, has said he is considering a run.
As I explained on WalbergWatch, I am not on the “Run Mark Run” bandwagon. He might be a good candidate, but I have some concerns. Here they are as expressed on WalbergWatch:
1) Schauer would have to vacate (or spend much less time at) his post as Senate Democratic leader, leaving us rudderless in the Senate when he's needed most. Fixing the budget situation is a big deal.It is very easy to brush off these concerns, as some writers have. But that would be a mistake. One commenter believes there’s no comparison between a U.S. House seat and a Senate seat:
2) If Senator Schauer were to beat Walberg, that would create a vacancy in his Senate seat. At least temporarily, that gives Republicans a larger majority in the State Senate.
3) Worse, there would have to be a special election for his senatorial seat. The sad truth is that Right to Life and conservative zealots are much more effective about getting their core people to the polls during special elections. Given that he holds a Republican seat, it is more than likely that a Republican will regain that seat in the special election. Since it would be less than half a term (4 years) until the next election – 2010 – that Republican could run for reelection in 2010 and 2014. You would have Republican control of the seat for almost 10 years!
I say this not to take a shot at Schauer. But we need to slow down a second before the "Run Mark Run" hysteria takes control of our reason. There are two impressive candidates in the field already.
We should also keep in mind there are orders of magnitude difference in the importance of the Michigan State Senate and the US Congress. Having a great guy lead the minority Senate Democrats for his last two years before being term limited is good. Knocking off one of the most right wing members of Congress and helping to guarantee majority control of congress is vital. That to me just does not seem to be a close call!“Anonymous” forgets the importance of holding Democratic seats as we enter redistricting. Following the 2010 Census, the Legislature and governor will have to sign off on a package of bills laying out the new districts for Michigan’s congressional delegation, state Senate, state House and Court of Appeals. If the Democrats have control of the House, Senate and governor’s office going into 2010, they can craft a 10-year redistricting plan that maximizes their advantages in future elections. If there is divided control, expect little-to-no marginal advantage for the Democrats.
As of now, the only place Democrats lack control is in the Senate, where they’re only down by two seats. A mere two-seat Democratic gain would allow a Democratic lieutenant governor to break the tie (19-19) and throw control to the Democrats. If we have control, we write the redistricting plan. If we have Schauer’s seat, we’re much more likely to be in control.
1 comment:
Just read where Schauer is going to delay his decision. Definitely the smart move. Seems like he has a little buyer's remorse. The prospect of being Minority Leader in Bishop's chamber of Sand and Fog for 4 years can't be all that challening. Kinda like a cat playing with a half dead legless mouse. But just because his wife says she is willing to move for DC doesn't mean he should go back on his promise to serve 4 years.
Post a Comment