Beware of Republicans Promising Gifts

Yesterday, the Boston Globe reported that local Republicans are courting Essex County Sheriff Frank Cousins Jr to run against Senator Kennedy. Now, I've got nothing against the Sheriff, and I don't know anything more about him than what I saw on Greater Boston last week. It's seems Cousins has been the target of some racist remarks posted on the Correctional Officer's Internet message board. He came off very well in his conversation with Emily Rooney, and the lawyer for the Correctional Officer's Union who rebutted the charges the next night came off as one of the more loathsome members of his profession. In any event, in the Globe article, this passage stood out:

In August, Cousins met with a coordinator from the National Republican Senatorial Committee, according to a GOP official. The committee can provide $35,000 in cash and unlimited indirect expenditures, such an independent ads or operations through the state party to help a GOP senate candidate.

I know it's early for predictions, but I think it's pretty safe to say that the NRSC is not going to make Massachusetts a campaign priority in 2006. Oh sure, they'll mention that they're fighting Ted Kennedy in their fundraising letters, but if Cousins, or whoever ends up running against Senator Kennedy sees more than a pittance from the National GOP, I'd be surprised. They've got too many races where they need to spend money on open seats and defending vulnerable incumbents like Rick Santorum (R-PA) in Pennsylvania who is polling well below his Democratic challenger and Lincoln Chafee (R-RI) who must weather challenges from both the left and the right next year. Other Senators including Jim Talent (R-MO), John Kyl (R-AZ) and John Ensign (R-NV) are already facing strong challengers. Granted, the GOP seems to have bottomless campaign coffers, but I doubt they're going to throw money away in a guaranteed loss, just so a local Sheriff can raise his statewide profile.

Kennedy Statement on John Roberts

Senator Ted Kennedy, who according to the Boston Globe has been tapped to be the "point person for strategy and messaging" for the Supreme Court confirmation hearings, has released this statement regarding the president's nomination of John Roberts:

“This is a critical moment for this country’s future. If John Roberts is confirmed, he will have a vital role in setting the direction of the country for generations to come.

The Supreme Court is often the last line of defense for the freedoms and liberties for hundreds of millions of Americans. Few responsibilities of the Senate are more important than reviewing the qualifications of nominees for the Supreme Court. Every Senator, Republican or Democrats, has a responsibility to determine whether Mr. Roberts deserves to join the currently closely divided court when so much is at stake. It’s wrong for any Senator to be a rubberstamp.

All of us in the Senate who have been through this process know the importance of this process. Every American ought to be asking some tough questions right now about whether Mr. Roberts is fit to serve on the highest court in the land.

Will he protect average Americans when their rights are abused by powerful corporations?

Will he ensure that private companies aren’t allowed to pollute our rivers and lakes and our air?

Will he protect and preserve the progress we’ve made on equal opportunity and fairness for all Americans?

Will he separate his personal ideology from the rule of law and protect the rights and freedoms of all Americans, not just the powerful or the wealthy.
...

You can read the rest of the statement at tedkennedy.com.

From what I've read in the past few hours it seems to me like Roberts is an unremarkable Republican hack who in the worst case turns out to be a less belligerent Scalia and in the best case turns into another Souter. I'm willing to roll the dice on this guy unless something disturbing turns up in the course of his confirmation hearings. Check out Blue Mass Group for a great rundown of the nominee.

Senatorial Approval Ratings

Following up to their gubernatorial approval ratings last month, SUSA has compiled polls on all 100 Senators. You can find the full results for our Massachusetts senators here. After yesterday's discussion about how Massachusetts politicians can appeal to Independents, I thought it would be interesting to see how self-described Moderates and Independents viewed our two Senators.

	Moderates		Independents
	Approve	Disapprove	Approve	Disapprove
Ted Kennedy	64%	30%	56%	39%
John Kerry	56%	40%	50%	44%

It's interesting to note that both Moderates and Independents not only prefer Kennedy to Kerry, but also disapprove of him less. It might just be because he's a Kennedy, and Kerry is coming of a losing presidential race, but it might be because you at least always know where Kennedy stands. I'll let you draw your own conclusions.

Speaking of Senator Kennedy, it looks like the state GOP still can't find anyone to run against him. GOP consultant Charley Manning was practically begging ambitious Republicans to challenge the Senator to build on a future run. Still, that hasn't stopped Kennedy's team from jumping all over the Wall Street Journal Op/Ed which advised Governor Mitt Romney himself to take on Kennedy. From a Kennedy fundraising e-mail:

[Romney] wants to run for President in 2008. But along the way, he has a decision in 2006 -- whether to run for governor again, or take on Senator Kennedy.

As Romney plots his rise, conservative commentators say that if he can "defeat the brother of JFK," he will have done more to "add momentum to a run for the presidency than anything he could accomplish as governor." That's the empty ambition of Republicans like Romney. A race against Kennedy would be, in the words of the Wall Street Journal, to "gain political capital" for a White House run.

It's only fair -- after all Romney has been using Kennedy's name in fundraising letters for months (probably years) now and Romney's popularity among Massachusetts Democrats is not getting any higher with the Governor's recent rhetoric.

Unintentional Comedy From the WSJ

Brendan Miniter has a ridiculous piece in the Wall Street Journal where he advises Governor Romney that the best way for him to increase his Presidential chances is for him to decline to run for re-election, but run for Ted Kennedy's Senate seat.

The biggest reason to consider a Senate bid is the opponent: Sen. Ted Kennedy. Losing such a race would not be devastating, since hardly anyone thinks Mr. Kennedy is beatable. It certainly wouldn't be anywhere near as harmful to Mr. Romney's political future as losing a bid for re-election as governor. Unlike in the gubernatorial race, a loss in a Senate bid could be turned into a political victory. Mr. Romney did just that when he challenged the senior senator in 1994. He turned that loss into a net positive by pointing out on the speaking circuit afterward that he surprised everyone by winning a surprising 41% of the vote--an impressive performance against a Kennedy in Massachusetts.

He would gain real political capital, of course, if he managed to pick off the old liberal icon. John Thune certainly gained instant respect among grassroots conservatives by beating Minority Leader Tom Daschle last year. And there is a slim hope that such a gamble could pay off. Mr. Romney has a lot more name ID than he did in 1994, and as governor he can spend the next 18 months campaigning in the state while the lethargic and detached Sen. Kennedy splits his time between Washington and his home in Hyannis Port, Mass.

Romney lost his 1994 race against Kennedy by 17 points, which would be a landslide defeat if it were against anyone else but Kennedy. Remember, too, that polls showed the candidates in a dead heat as late as September of that year. The more people found out about Romney, the better Kennedy looked that year.

As for being lethargic and detached, well, that's a far cry from the dancing firebrand I saw on Saturday. Never mind that Kennedy has over 4.7 million dollars on hand (and counting) in preparation for a race against nobody. In fact, since that 1994 race, Kennedy stopped taking his opposition for granted. He raised over six and a half million dollars to trounce the non-entity Jack E. Robinson in 2000. In fact, I've argued that the state GOP probably wants to make Kennedy as much of a non-factor in 2006 as possible to ensure that his formidable organization doesn't drag down their quest to retain the governorship.

Miniter seems to think that Romney would have at least a small shot at beating Kennedy, but it's clear to me that this would be a huge waste of time and money for the governor. If he wants to spend 2007 and 2008 unemployed, he should just decline to run for re-election. Why should he waste millions of dollars on a race he won't win for a Senate seat everyone knows he's just going to leave? Not only that, but were he to run for Senate he'd have to take stands on all those national issues that, as governor, he can be vague on (a Romney specialty). He's having enough trouble running for president and governor at the same time.

Kennedy Debuts His New Site

As reported by MyDD.com and the Blue Mass Group, Ted Kennedy debuted his new website this week -- TedKennedy.com. I was involved in the conference call with the Senator on Monday where he announced that he wanted his site to be a clearinghouse for information on what's going on in the Senate, and particularly a place to find out more about the 'nuclear' option -- the Republican scheme to turn the Senate into a rubber stamp for Bush's judicial appointees. Kennedy's site should serve as a nice complement to Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid's "war room" at Democrats.Senate.gov.

The conference call itself was a little surreal. Here is one of the longest serving US Senators, a bunch of the lefty blogosphere's heaviest hitters and little old me. The fact that I -- a nobody living in Watertown -- was invited to participate after only a few months of blogging says as much to me about his commitment to the netroots than any webpage. Senator Kennedy gave a quick rundown of the ways that the Republicans are trying to squelch dissent in the Senate, and in Congress in general, and then took questions.

One thing that the Senator did not emphasize was what we here in Massachusetts could do if we wanted to stop the 'nuclear' option. After all, our Senators certainly don't need any convincing -- Kerry is already on the record as being vehemently opposed to it. He said we should continue to follow the situation closely and, in particular, spread the word.

It's too early to say, but it seems like the Democratic message is getting out. Harry Reid was on the Ed Schultz Show today saying that the Republicans don't have the votes yet, or else they'd have gone nuclear already. Rick Santorum is apparently privately arguing for a delay in light of some recent GOP internal polling that shows the public is against the Senate rule changes. Still, the Judiciary committee has already approved (along partisan lines of course) three of the ten judges that were rejected in the last Senate session. If these judges are truly objectionable, any delay by the Republicans would just give the Democrats more time to explain to the public why they are unfit for the bench and what the consequences of approving them would be.

Kennedy Wants to Go It Alone

Sunday's Globe has an interesting article about Senator Ted Kennedy's apparent desire to be unopposed in 2006. At first, I thought that was kind of tacky, but when you think about it, I'm sure every politican wants to run unopposed. Kennedy is just one of the few who has the money and the clout to make it happen. It won't be his decision, of course, but by raising more money than would ever be necessary for him to keep his seat, he can frighten off anyone who doesn't want to dump resources into a losing effort.

The state Republicans, I'm sure, are having a tough time trying to find someone who will get no money to fight a battle they won't win. In fact, the article touches on the fact that a well-funded and motivated Kennedy organization is probably the last thing the state GOP wants their slate of legislature candidates to have to contend with downticket. Of course, if state Republicans would benefit from leaving Kennedy without opposition, out of state Republicans will pay the price. Kennedy's millions will likely go to Democratic Senate candidates in places like Pennsylvania, Minnesota and Rhode Island if he doesn't have to spend it on himself. Of course, Mitt's the one who needs to win favor with the national Republicans, so the Mass GOP probably won't be taking that into account.

On the other hand, I'm sure the state Democrats would love to get their hands on some of Kennedy's money. They may even get some of it, but what they won't get if Kennedy has no Republican opponent is any organizational help for the gubernatorial race. A motivated Kennedy, who already has a bone to pick with Romney, could only help to bring Democratic partisans to the polls in the mid-year. Getting people out may be the Democrats' biggest problem in '06 as the most likely candidates are either moderately uninspiring (Reilly and Galvin) or politically inexperienced (Patrick).

The other thing Republicans should factor in when weighing a run against Kennedy is the race for Governor in 2010. Even if Mitt wins his next election and stays for the whole term, I can't see him running for a third. He barely seems interested in his first, and if it can't get him to the presidency, he just may pack it back up to Utah. An aspiring Republican with a decent personal finance (Chris Egan?) could use the race against Kennedy to boost his or her name recognition in preparation for a future race, the way Mitt himself did in 1994 (unintentionally, I'm sure). Of course, Romney is still showing signs of bailing on his '06 race, so perhaps it's best for GOP aspirants to sit back and wait for things to unfold.