Tuesday, April 28, 2015

To Run or Not to Run

Rep. Dina Titus (D-NV)
Rep. Dina Titus is in something of a jam right now.  On paper, she's the sort of candidate that the DSCC would be clamoring to run for the U.S. Senate.  She's a three-term House member with statewide election experience, someone who has run for tough elections before (both winning and losing them), and who has strong support in early polling.  She's clearly an ambitious pol, frequently taking on races that might have had a presumed frontrunner, and even more frequently, coming out ahead as a result.

She's also, categorically, the underdog in the race to replace Sen. Harry Reid.  This is because Titus, long a thorn in the side of Harry Reid despite their shared party status, is not getting the early support of the DSCC.  The Democratic Senate committee, after being a bit stunned by the retirement of Senator Harry Reid, quickly coalesced around former Nevada Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto as their preferred candidate, despite Titus's strong approval ratings and the committee's history of staying out of contentious primaries.  In fact, one could argue that Sen. Jon Tester has taken an early stand in more Democratic primaries than any other recent chair, with clear favorites in California, Florida, and Ohio despite a theoretically competitive primary for the former and near certain contested primaries in the latter by sitting office-holders.  However, I'm not going to focus on Tester's decision-making at the moment, but on Titus's, because Rep. Dina Titus has a decision to make, and it's one that several candidates on both sides of the aisle have to weigh right now: do you run in 2016 and take on a fellow candidate, or do you line yourself up for a race in 2018 or beyond?

It's no secret that both parties try to avoid contested primaries at all costs, and as a result there are perils for incumbents who buck the status quo.  We've seen what happened with candidates in contested primaries in Georgia (in 2010 and 2014) and Missouri (in 2012) for the Republicans: the runners-up are never heard from again.  Like all things in politics, winning means a major foothold into public life.  While Titus is never going to run for president, she'll certainly have enormous power outside of her current scope if she were to get promoted to the Senate, and with Reid retiring, would become the most powerful figure in Nevada Democratic politics.  It's a lot on the plus side, but she will be going against Reid's wishes, and you can bet the Nevada Senate leader will be pulling out every major stop he can think of to ensure his protegee Cortez Masto takes his seat, further securing his legacy.

It's also not like Dina Titus doesn't have options here or a lot to lose if she moves on to a tough election.  For starters, she's currently a House member in a safe district, something that is nothing to sneeze about, and if Cortez Masto loses, she'll still be the most important Democrat in public office in Nevada.  There's also two very attractive options for her two years down the road: the Republicans will have to vacate the governor's mansion in 2018, a seat that Titus ran for and lost in a close election in 2006, and Sen. Dean Heller (R) will be up for reelection.  While the prospect of a Midterm may not be as attractive to a Democrat after 2010 and 2014, Nevada has swung further left these past few years and if Titus can negotiate with the powers-that-be to keep one of these primaries cleared (a deal I'm sure the DSCC and probably even Harry Reid would endorse, hoping to kill two birds with one stone), it may be a decent solution.

This is something we're seeing across the country.  In Florida, for example, Rep. Tom Rooney, Attorney General Pam Bondi, and State CFO Jeff Atwater have all turned down a chance to run for Sen. Marco Rubio's open seat, leaving the nomination to some lower-on-the-totem-pole candidates likes Reps. Vern Buchanan, Ron DeSantis, and Curt Clawson.  This isn't because the above three aren't ambitious, but they're playing the odds; while the Republicans may have had an easier shot at the nomination this year, being governor of Florida puts you instantly on presidential shortlists (and that seat will open in 2018) and they think they can take on Sen. Bill Nelson (D) (or more likely, an open seat) in an easier election during a Midterm.  The same thing could be said for Gwen Graham (D) in Florida, as well as Attorney General Lisa Madigan in Illinois and Rep. Tim Ryan in Ohio.

This sometimes works, admittedly.  Rep. Mark Udall probably could have made a serious play for the Senate in 2004 or the governor's mansion in 2006, but smartly waited until a year where he was assured the nomination and a win, taking a Senate seat in 2008.  While the election hasn't happened yet, polling appears strong that Sen. Russ Feingold (D) will be able to take back his Senate seat in Wisconsin despite having had an even better shot at an open seat in 2012 when he demurred and Tammy Baldwin took the office.  Attorney General Richard Blumenthal played Hamlet on the Housatonic for years before finally landing an open Senate seat in 2010 (his fellow senator Chris Murphy waited his turn and got his reward two years later).  And Rep. Ed Markey skipped out on the 2012 matchup against Sen. Scott Brown for a much easier open race in 2013.

However, waiting has its price.  For every story of-the-above there's a David Dewhurst, who passed on a run for the Senate in 2002 only to watch his opportunity squashed years later by Ted Cruz.  Rep. Shelley Berkley skipped Senate races in 2000 and 2006 just to watch her career go up in smoke in 2012.  And of course we all know the tale of Chris Christie, who had his shot at the presidential nomination in 2012 and then decided to wait four years, watching his chances at the White House crumble during a week-long traffic jam.

As a result, we won't know for a few years whether or not Titus made the correct decision.  If I were her I'd play it safe, but her career has been based off of not playing it safe, so we'll see soon whether or not she made the correct call to run or not to run.

No comments: