 |
| Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) |
Boxer's absence, it should be noted, will be felt in political circles. I HIGHLY recommend that you check out this video of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi discovering from the press that she was retiring (one of those rare moments in Washington where a powerful politician is caught genuinely off-guard by an announcement). She was one of the fieriest liberals in the body, and though the likes of Elizabeth Warren have started to take over her crown, during the Bush administration, she was second only to Ted Kennedy in terms of the liberal go-to against the administration (she was the Senator who filed a Congressional objection to Ohio's electoral votes in 2004, the first time in over 100 years a member of the body had done so). She has been the biggest champion for climate change legislation in the Senate, a mantle I desperately hope some other senator (perhaps Brian Schatz or Jeff Merkley) takes up on her behalf. She was also, admittedly, one of my favorite senators and this is a tough one for me after losing some of my other favorites (whether through retirement or the "forced" retirement of the voters) this past November.
From an electoral standpoint, though, this is a truly interesting turn-of-events for a variety of reasons. The first, of course, is that the nation's largest state is guaranteed a new senator for the first time in over twenty years. Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein were both elected for the first time in 1992, and have won every election since, so ambitious pols in the state haven't had a shot at the Senate in a generation. The two leading contenders for the position appear to be Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Kamala Harris. Both have won statewide multiple times, and are wildly popular with the base and the establishment in the state. The good news on this front (from a cost perspective) is that the two are quite good friends personally, and it seems unlikely that they will run against each other with both holding office until 2018 and two gourmet prospects being on the menu that year (Gov. Jerry Brown is term-limited out leaving the statehouse open, and as the oldest senator currently serving, Dianne Feinstein may also retire). Neither will want to put a giant stain on their resume by losing in a primary to the other, and I suspect they'll coordinate support behind-the-scenes for the race.
It should be noted, of course, that California is teaming with Democrats who have been waiting years for one of the two senators to retire. People ranging from former LA Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa to billionaire financier Tom Steyer to the state's five other Democratic constitutional officers (not counting Harris and Newsom) to the 39 House Democrats in the state could all see this as their shot at a promotion, and go for it. This would normally not be a problem, outside of the smearing of Democrats in the most expensive state in the country to campaign, but California has a very odd electoral system that should cause the state party some alarm.
In California, the primary is an open-party primary, where only the top two will advance. This isn't a problem if the party has coalesced behind someone like Harris or Newsom, but if multiple House Democrats also run, for example (and many of them, like Loretta Sanchez and John Garamendi, have been standing in line a lot longer than Newsom or Harris), we could run into a situation that California Democrats have become all-to-familiar with: the split vote. In 2012, for example, Rep. Gary Miller became one of the luckiest men in the House when four Democrats manage to split the vote enough for Miller to get a Republican opponent keeping the seat in the GOP's hands despite the district going for President Obama by 17-points and two years later, in the middle of a wave, the Democrats were able to pick up the seat. Two years later, in the State Controller race, the Democrats nearly did the same thing, with Democrat Betty Yee winning a spot in the general over a Republican by less than a percentage point. These races have to be giving Democrats heartburn, particularly if a number of Democrats jump into the race and an ambitious pair of Republicans smell blood in the water.
Still, the likely result will be a Democrat and a Republican, which will certainly end up being a Democrat in such a blue state in a presidential election. My gut tells me that Kamala Harris will make the run right now, as she seems more eager to enter the national stage. In many ways she reminds me of the likes of Cory Booker and Marco Rubio-eager to get her spot at the national table (and a presidential launching pad) and less concerned whether it's as governor or senator. Harris, one of the Democratic Party's biggest rising stars and one of the few that didn't get knocked out in the 2010 and 2014 Midterms, would be a huge recruiting coup for the DSCC, and I suspect Jon Tester will be making calls post haste. In the meantime though, expect a lot of speculation over what candidates get in here, and what other senators (Joe Manchin? John McCain? Barbara Mikulski?) will soon be joining her on the retirement list.
No comments:
Post a Comment