Republican Governors Gamble On Reopening Early

The pandemic has become somewhat of a partisan issue. Many Republican states are reopening early while Democratic states are playing it cautious. The resulting differences in both the impact of the Coronavirus and the local economies are likely to play into this year’s elections.

Several weeks ago, the White House put forth a proposed plan for reopening the country. Triggers for the plan included a 14-day downward trajectory of cases reporting influenza and COVID-like symptoms, a 14-day downward trajectory of confirmed COVID cases or positive tests, the ability of hospitals to treat all patients with crisis care, and having a robust testing program in place. I’m not sure that any state meets these benchmarks, particularly the call for robust testing.

There are fundamental, nonpolitical differences between the majority of red and blue states. Blue states, which are congregated along the coasts, have higher population densities and more urban. This may be why, as Axios points out, blue states have so far had higher rates of both infection and death from COVID-19.

That doesn’t mean that red states are out of the woods yet, however. In the last half of April red states saw higher percentage increases. Statistically this makes sense because an increase of the same number of cases will yield a higher percentage increase where the total number of cases was lower. For example, the addition of 10 cases would be a 10 percent increase in a state that had 100 cases previously, but it would be a one percent increase where there were 1,000 old cases.

Red states, which tend to be more rural and sparsely populated, are more difficult territory for Coronavirus to spread through. That doesn’t mean that it can’t happen. When rural people congregate, the virus can spread rapidly if it is present. Here in Georgia, some of the worst outbreaks outside of Atlanta were spread through religious services.

Where COVID-19 takes hold in red states, it can be deadly. Residents of nonmetro areas tend to be both older and have more underlying health problems than city dwellers. Often age and health problems go hand-in-hand. Both categories are high-risk for COVID-19. Further, demographic data from many southern states show that blacks are far more at-risk for negative outcomes from COVID-19 than whites.

When it comes to reopening, new cases are a more useful metric than deaths. Because COVID-19 takes about three weeks to kill on average, deaths are more of a form of historical data, hinting at the number of infections several weeks ago. New confirmed cases are more useful in determining how fast the virus is currently spreading.

Despite the bad press regarding Georgia’s reopening, Gov. Brian Kemp has handled the situation relatively well. Although the state did not meet the recommended 14-days of decreasing numbers when it reopened, Georgia’s seven-day moving average of Coronavirus cases has now been sharply trending down since April 22. On May 4, Georgia reported only 44 new cases. This is a positive sign that the state has seen the worst of the first wave of cases.

The downside is that many Georgians seem to be no longer following social distancing guidelines. Gov. Kemp lifted the general shelter-in-place order but encouraged Georgians to stay home when possible, but social distancing guidelines and shelter-in-place for “medically fragile” and elderly Georgia residents are still the order of the day. However, many residents seem to think that social distancing and mask recommendations are yesterday’s news. On my recent trips to town, I’ve noted that people congregating more closely and fewer are wearing masks.

In Florida, another hot-button state, cases peaked in late March but have trended down slowly. Per the Florida Department of Health, the Sunshine State is still recording 4,512 new cases per week, more than 600 per day. Yet, Florida began its phase one of reopening on Monday, as it recorded 819 new cases in one day.

The difference between the two states likely reflects a different strategy on reopening. There are at least two schools of thought on when to reopen. One is to move the IHME trend line down to the point where hospitals can cope with the surge of cases. The second is to move the trend line down even further to the point where transmission of the virus is drastically reduced and a secondary flareup is unlikely, at least in the short term. In Florida’s case, the state has achieved the first goal per the current IHME modeling for the state. It is possible that Georgia has achieved the second.

Gov. Greg Abbott of Texas is also taking an aggressive approach. Texas State Health Services reports a stable level of new cases, which increased slightly in late April and early May. Unsurprisingly, the highest levels of Texas cases are in Houston’s Harris County and Dallas County. KHOU reported that there were hundreds of complaints in the days following reopening that Houston businesses were not following the social distancing guidelines established by the governor’s office.

At least two other red states have taken a more conservative approach. In Mississippi, Republican Gov. Tate Reeves delayed the state’s reopening last week after a spike in new cases. The state’s Department of Health website shows a downward trend but notes that recent data may not be complete. Yesterday, Gov. Reeves amended his emergency order to allow some restaurants and businesses to reopen on May 7 if they follow strict social distancing and sanitary guidelines.

In Ohio, the Department of Health reports a 21-day average which has been declining since May 1. At 560 on May 4, the state is far off of its April 19 peak of 1,380 new cases. As a result, Gov. Mike Dewine, a Republican, plans to open about 90 percent of the state by next week.

Governors of both parties are walking a tightrope between rekindling the pandemic and mitigating economic damage. The situation is made all the more difficult by a vocal minority of citizens who are demanding that states be reopened immediately. Recent polling shows that a large majority of Americans, including most Republicans, support social distancing, however, and are more concerned about reopening too quickly than too late.

The rush to reopen states paired with a growing abandonment of social distancing measures at the grassroots level has led to an uptick in projected Coronavirus deaths. In early April, forecasted deaths were revised down to 60,000 following the implementation of the mitigation strategy. The US hit the 60,000 mark last week, however, and, as mitigation strategies are jettisoned, death estimates have more than doubled to 134,000.

To put that number in perspective, it would be more than the number of American soldiers killed in World War I, a number which incidentally included a large number of casualties from the Spanish flu pandemic of 1918. This year the US has had to relearn many lessons of past pandemics such as the Spanish flu. One of those lessons is that reopening too early leads to more loss of life.

“One clear lesson of the 1918 pandemic is to be wary of that kind of thinking,” said James Leloudis, a history professor at the University of North Carolina. “Letting down the guard, in that case, turned out to be disastrous. It’s the same situation we are in now.”

In the midst of the emergency, it is difficult to see what the correct moves are because we don’t have all the information. We don’t know how many people are infected and not tested. We don’t know if there will be additional waves of infections. We don’t know if or when effective treatments and vaccines will be discovered. We don’t even know how many asymptomatic carriers are spreading the disease. What we do know is that reopening earlier will cost an unknown number of lives.

Republican governors are gambling that the disease has largely run its course and that the loss of life from reopening will be minimal enough to be acceptable to the majority of their state’s voters. We won’t know for some time, possibly years, whether these gambles were correct. In November, voters will begin to rule on whether those gambles a good bet.

Originally published on The Resurgent

Today's Mississippi Senate Runoff Favors Republicans

Republican Cindy Hyde-Smith holds the edge in the Mississippi Senate runoff today. Mississippi is typically a red state but Hyde-Smith’s comments about a “public hanging” and allegations of racism have given the race an air of uncertainty.

On Nov. 6, Hyde-Smith, the Republican appointed by Gov. Phil Bryant to replace Thad Cochran after his retirement, bested three other candidates but failed to win the majority required. Today’s runoff pits her against the Democrat Mike Espy, the second-place finisher.

After the Nov. 6 election, a video surfaced of Hyde-Smith complimenting a supporter by saying, “If he invited me to a public hanging, I’d be on the first row.” In a second video, the senator joked that “maybe we want to make it just a little more difficult” for “liberal folks” to vote, a controversial statement amid charges of voter suppression by Democrats. Other controversies have also erupted amid allegations that Hyde-Smith attended a segregated private school after Mississippi schools were integrated and that she cosponsored a resolution honoring a former Confederate soldier who “fought to defend his homeland and contributed to the rebuilding of the country.”

The racial aspect of the campaign may have a big impact since Mississippi is a state where blacks make up 38 percent of the population. Only 32 percent of the electorate on Nov. 6 was black, but the allegations about Hyde-Smith and the fact that the Democratic candidate is black may encourage black voters to turn out for the runoff in larger numbers. Mississippi allows registered voters to vote in the runoff even if they did not vote in the Nov. 6 election.

There has been only one public poll of the runoff. The RRH Elections survey found Hyde-Smith leading Espy by a 54-44 percent margin. While this seems to be a comfortable margin, the fact that President Trump conducted a series of rallies in the state seems to indicate that Republicans are leaving nothing to chance.

Polls close in Mississippi at 7:00 p.m. Central time. If Hyde-Smith retains her seat, Republicans will have a 53-47 advantage when the new Congress convenes next year.  

Originally published on the Resurgent

Republicans Shouldn't Joke About Hangings

From the WTF files, the Republican incumbent senator in Mississippi commented about being on the “front row” of a “public hanging.” If you are wondering in what context it is appropriate for senators anywhere, much less Mississippi, to use the phrase “public hanging” in an approving sense, there is none.

The unfortunate and asinine comment came in a video released over the weekend that depicted a Nov. 2 conversation between Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith and a group of supporters in Tupelo. In the video clip, Hyde-Smith is standing beside a tall man who has been identified as Colin Hutchinson, a cattle rancher who supported her re-election campaign. Hutchinson has his arm around her shoulders and the two are standing in front of a small group of supporters, all of whom are white.

The dialogue is difficult to make out because of a train horn that is blowing at the same time, but Hyde-Smith gestures toward the man and clearly says, “If he invited me to a public hanging, I’d be on the first row.”

In a statement released on Sunday, Hyde-Smith dismissed the comment as a joke, saying, “I referred to accepting an invitation to a speaking engagement. In referencing the one who invited me, I used an exaggerated expression of regard, and any attempt to turn this into a negative connotation is ridiculous.”

While Hyde-Smith’s comment was obviously an attempt at homespun humor, it is equally obvious that the joke fell flat and played right into the hands of the Democrats. In a close race with Democrat Mike Espy, who happens to be black, making a reference that would be connected with lynchings is monumentally stupid.

Whether Hyde-Smith intended the reference to be racial or not, many voters took it that way and now she has to spend time explaining to voters that she’s not a racist, she’s only a person who makes stupid comments. Most candidates would rather spend the weeks before a close runoff election talking about policy and criticizing their opponent instead of explaining their sense of humor.

Here’s a free piece of advice for Republican candidates everywhere: Democrats are going to try to paint you as bigots and racists. Don’t say things that help them do this.

Between 1877 and 1950, about 4,000 black people and about half as many whites were lynched by racial mobs that often included members of the Ku Klux Klan. The murderers in the cases were rarely prosecuted. One of the most famous lynchings, the murder of Emmet Till, occurred in Mississippi as did the murders of Medgar Evers and other civil rights workers. It is not surprising that modern black Americans are still a bit sensitive about a century of lawlessness and racial violence.

It shouldn’t come as a shock to most readers that the Republican Party has a problem with minorities. Exit polls confirm that the GOP’s performance with minorities, particularly black voters, is abysmal. When Republicans such as Cindy Hyde-Smith make comments that can be perceived as race-baiting by minority voters, it only confirms the attitudes that black voters already have about Republicans.

The thoughtless remark may also put Mississippi’s Senate seat in jeopardy. Hyde-Smith was appointed to take the place of Thad Cochran, a Republican Senator who retired earlier this year. In the election last week, she finished one point ahead of Espy in a three-way race that also included Republican Chris McDaniel. Since no candidate received a majority of votes, Hyde-Smith and Espy now face each other in a runoff.

Mississippi is typically considered a red state. It has not had a Democrat Senator since 1988, but, like many Southern states, Mississippi has a large black population that typically votes Democrat. In fact, blacks make up about 38 percent of Mississippi’s population, but only 32 percent of Mississippi voters this year were black. There's a pretty good chance that black voters might be motivated to turn out for a black Democrat over a white Republican who jokes about lynching.

Mississippi is red in large part because many of its black voters don’t show up. If the Republican Party continues to alienate black voters while its candidates simultaneously make statements that motivate black voters to get to the polls, it won’t end well for the GOP.

The Republican Party seems to have gotten the notion that it can nominate pretty much anybody in the South and they will still get elected because Democrats are worse. Donald Trump bragging about grabbing kittens? Sure. Brian Kemp pointing a gun at his daughter's beau and talking about hauling illegals in his pick-em-up truck? Fine. Ron DeSantis teaching his toddler to build a wall with blocks? Okay.

2018 should be a wakeup call for Republicans. They didn’t actually lose across the South, but they very nearly did. Kemp, DeSantis, Rick Scott, and even Ted Cruz in Texas had very narrow victories. If Republicans keep nominating people that appeal primarily to white Republicans with no regard for winning minority voters, they are probably going to start losing. The losing may begin with Cindy Hyde-Smith.

Senator Hyde-Smith should not try to defend her statement. She should apologize for making such a stupid joke. Being sensitive to how other people perceive what you say is not being politically correct. It’s being polite.

She should also go talk to some black voters. She should ask to address the state NAACP and go to some black church services. She should make visits to black neighborhoods and ask for the support of black voters. Until the GOP starts doing this, black voters will continue to support Democrats and thoughtless comments will further cement the status of blacks as a Democrat bloc.

Originally published on The Resurgent

New poll shows Trump might lose Mississippi to Clinton

(Youtube.com)

Amid questions about Donald Trump’s electability in the general election, a new poll may undermine Trump’s claims that he is the best candidate to defeat Hillary Clinton. At this stage of the campaign, most head-to-head matchups are national polls. Since the actual election hinges on state elections for the Electoral College, national head-to-head polls are of questionable value. One recent poll showed a state matchup between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton that should worry The Donald’s supporters.

Mississippi is a red state that has voted Republican in every election since its electors cast their ballots for Jimmy Carter in 1976. In most recent elections, it hasn’t even been close. For the past four presidential elections, Mississippi went for the Republican candidate by double-digit margins. This has been true even when the national popular vote was close, as it was in 2012.

This week, however, a new poll sent out a shockwave when it showed that Mississippi might be in play in a potential matchup between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. The Mason-Dixon poll of 625 registered voters found that Trump and Clinton were in a statistical tie at 46-43 percent.

The poll showed Clinton with an Obama-like majority of black voters at 93 percent and a convincing lead among women voters at 47-40 percent. Clinton also was favored by 11 percent of Republican voters.

The poll also asked who voters would support if an unnamed third party candidate was in the race. In this scenario, Trump and Hillary tied at 39 percent and the unknown candidate received 13 percent.

Both Ted Cruz and John Kasich performed better against Hillary than Trump did. Cruz beat Clinton by a 51-40 percent margin. Kasich did even better at 52-37 percent.

The problem is not that Trump is unknown. Ninety-nine percent of Mississippi voters are familiar with Trump. His approval rating is a net -11 points with 44 percent disapproving and only 33 percent viewing him favorably. This is still a higher approval rating than Trump has nationally.

Much of Trump’s problem is the scorched earth nature of his primary campaign. CNN exit polls from Wisconsin found that only 62 percent of Republicans would vote for Trump if he is the party’s nominee. Ten percent planned to vote for Clinton while 17 percent would back a third party candidate. Eight percent plan to sit out the election.

The Mississippi poll is the first hard evidence of the electoral disaster that awaits Republicans if they nominate Donald Trump. Electoral math would require Republicans to win at least four key battleground states that were won twice by President Obama. If a Trump candidacy endangers the Republican hold on Mississippi, chances of winning swing states would be nil. So would his chances of winning the White House.

Read it on Conservative Firing Line or Freedom Daily

Why the Tea Party fizzled in 2014

2010 was the year of the Tea Party. It seems now that the movement’s impact was a flash in the pan, however. The once mighty grassroots effort flopped in 2012 and continued to slide toward irrelevance in 2014. How did the spontaneous uprising against President Obama’s liberal policies fizzle so quickly, especially since President Obama himself is more unpopular than ever?

In 2010, it seemed that the grass roots conservative movement would shake the nation and upend the Obama Administration. That year saw the Democrats take a “shellacking” as Republicans took control the House of Representatives in a landslide of historic proportions. The Republican class of 2010 included such notable names as Marco Rubio, Rand Paul and Ted Cruz.

In the wake of 2010, many conservatives expected the Tea Party sweep to continue into 2012 and beyond. The Tea Party’s winning streak would end only two years later in 2012, however. That year began for conservatives with high hopes for not only unseating President Obama, but for winning control of the Senate as well. In the final tally, Republicans not only lost the presidential election but two additional Senate seats as well.

While the targeting of Tea Party groups by President Obama’s IRS had an impact on the election, a number of the 2012 losses can be directly attributed to the unforced errors and amateurish campaigns of poorly vetted Tea Party candidates. The names of Christine O’Donnell, Todd Aiken, and Richard Mourdock will live in infamy among conservatives. The roots of the Tea Party’s 2014 losses can be found in these failures of 2012.

The Tea Party’s biggest mistake of the 2014 cycle was pitting itself against the Republican establishment rather than maintaining a focus on unseating Democrats and fielding primary candidates for open seats. In 2014, the highest profile Tea Party candidates were fielded against Republican incumbents, many with sterling conservative voting records. There was Matt Bevin who ran against Mitch McConnell in Kentucky, Steve Sterling who tried to unseat John Cornyn in Texas, Milton Wolf who challenged Pat Roberts in Kansas and Chris McDaniel who ran a strong campaign against Thad Cochran in Mississippi. All of these candidates lost in hotly contested races in spite of being heavily supported by Tea Party groups.

These Tea Partiers failed to unseat the incumbent Republicans for largely the same reasons that 2012 Tea Partiers failed against the Democrats. There was poor vetting in the case of Milton Wolf, who, as it was revealed late in the campaign, liked to post graphic x-ray pictures of serious injuries on Facebook and joke about them, and Chris McDaniel, whose talk radio recordings proved a treasure trove of embarrassing comments. There were unforced errors such as Matt Bevin’s appearance at a rally to legalize cockfighting. Steve Stockman, who Christopher Hooks of Politico called “the Lone Star state’s weirdest lawmaker,” ran a campaign that may not have included a single public appearance.

It seems that Republican primary voters have learned to stop casting aside perfectly good candidates for the flavor-of-the-month just because they have an established and successful career in politics. When in a life-or-death struggle with liberal Democrats, experience in Washington can be a good thing. This is especially true when the incumbents have strong conservative voting records as McConnell, Cornyn and Roberts do.

The value of experience may have been driven home to Republican voters in October 2013 with the defund debacle. The attempt to defund Obamacare last year was led by Tea Party favorites Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) and Mike Lee (R-Utah). The pair browbeat reticent Republicans into falling in line with their plan to defund the Affordable Care Act, which had, in reality, included its own funding.

The flaw in the Cruz-Lee plan was that the Republicans did not hold a Senate majority, let alone one that could override an Obama veto. Compounding their error, the pair made no attempt to swing the support of vulnerable Democrats to their cause. When the Democrats predictably refused to defund their pet project, the Republicans eventually were forced to cave on their demands to prevent a federal default. Because Obamacare was self-funded, it was implemented on schedule even as national parks were closed. To add insult to injury, the government shutdown distracted the media from the story of Obamacare’s disastrous rollout.

Ironically, the biggest Tea Party successes of 2014 had little support from national Tea Party groups. Dave Brat, the insurgent candidate who unseated Eric Cantor in the largest upset of the Republican primary season, was not funded or backed by national Tea Party groups until after he won. Another so-called Tea Party candidate, Ben Sasse, who won the Republican Senate nomination for a vacant seat in Nebraska, was actually supported by both “establishment” and Tea Party Republicans according to The Atlantic. Sasse was the second choice of Tea Party groups and was attacked by FreedomWorks before the group changed its mind and supported him.

Polling by Gallup shows that that in its early days, the Tea Party found strong support among Republicans. Between 2010 and 2014, Tea Party support among Republicans fell by 20 points (to 41 percent) and opponents doubled (to 11 percent).

Among Americans at large, the story is much the same. The Tea Party had the support of about one in three Americans in 2010. Opposition surged ahead of the 2012 elections and again in late 2013 in the wake of the government shutdown. Going into the 2014 election season, Tea Party opponents outnumbered supporters by 27-23 percent according to Gallup. An even larger segment of the population simply does not care about the Tea Party.

The Tea Party fizzled for two reasons. First, the group tried to take on not one, but both, parties with candidates of poor quality. Second, the group faced a backlash because of the poor strategy involved in the attempt to defund Obamacare. The Tea Party alienated its natural consistency in the Republican Party by attacking party stalwarts with the label of “RINO” and nearly killing the party’s chances in 2014 with the government shutdown.

At this point, with only 41 percent approval in the GOP, the Tea Party label is not necessarily helpful to Republicans even among the party base. With only 23 percent approval among voters, it may well be toxic in a general election. Successful Tea Party candidates must follow the Ben Sasse model and appeal to both factions of the GOP.

Nevertheless, the Tea Party is not dead and will likely live on as a faction of the Republican Party. As Michael Tanner pointed out in National Review, the Tea Party is doing what it set out to do even without any of its candidates winning. The Tea Party has forced the Republican Party back to the right after years of Bush-era spending. The knowledge that they will face a Tea Party challenge from the right if they drift too far toward the center will hold the feet of Republican incumbents to the fire for years to come.

Read the full article on Examiner.com

Tea Party losses bode well for GOP

As the 2014 primary election season draws to a close, it is apparent that voters have rejected the vast majority of Tea Party candidates in favor of traditional Republicans. In spite of much ballyhooed and hard fought challenges against Republican incumbents, only one prominent Republican, Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.) was defeated by a Tea Party challenger, Dave Brat, who was not funded or backed by national Tea Party groups. The Tea Party losses are a good thing for the Republican Party as a whole and make a Republican Senate majority more likely.

As noted before in Examiner, most Republican officeholders are real conservatives. Charges that they are “RINOs” or “closet liberals” do not stand up to the scrutiny of their voting records. Nevertheless, Tea Party challengers leveled these and other charges against Republican incumbents in their campaign attacks from the right.

Contrary to the belief of many on the right, elections are not merely won by marshaling the conservative base. While getting out the conservative vote is important, conservatives do not make up a majority in any state except Wyoming according to a January 2014 Gallup poll. Elections are decided by the moderate and independent voters who do not adhere to either party. For many Republican candidates, having fended off challengers from the right may make them more appealing to the undecided voters in the middle of political spectrum.

Second, while some Tea Party candidates have been very qualified and successful, think Rand Paul and Ted Cruz, others have made serious mistakes that caused the Republican Party to lose elections that should have been easily winnable. The names of past Tea Party losers include Todd Akin of Missouri (“legitimate rape”), Richard Mourdock of Indiana (pregnancy from rape is “something God intended”), and Christine O’Donnell of Maryland (“I dabbled in witchcraft”). Tea Party support for such candidates was one of the factors that cost Republicans control of the Senate in both 2010 and 2012. While candidates like Aiken and O’Donnell failed to win Democratic seats for the GOP, Mourdock transferred a Republican seat to the Democrats after defeating incumbent Richard Lugar in the primary.

Recent elections may show that Republican voters are becoming more discerning about who to vote for. In the current primary season, Republican voters have voted down a number of Tea Party nominees who would have almost certainly gone down to defeat in the general election. In Kentucky, Matt Bevin, challenger to Senator Mitch McConnell, was caught on video attending a rally to support the legalization of cockfighting. Bevin also was revealed to have supported TARP in 2008. The Tea Party challenger to Senator Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), Dr. Milton Wolf, was revealed to have posted numerous x-ray images of deceased patients on his Facebook page. Wolf then joked about the pictures with his Facebook friends. Even Chris McDaniel, who lost the hotly contested and controversial primary in Mississippi, would have been troubled in the general election by recordings of his talk radio show. By rejecting such flawed candidates, Republican voters increase the chances that Republicans will win control of the Senate.

Third, Tea Party identification is not helpful to moderate and independent voters. In June, a Gallup poll found that only 24 percent of registered voters considered themselves Tea Party supporters. One month earlier, Gallup had noted that Tea Party support among Republicans had declined to 41 percent, down 20 points from 2010. The Tea Party was always a conservative and libertarian movement. At its height, in 2011, only 30 percent of Americans were supporters.

When independent voters were polled, Gallup found an almost even split between supporters and opponents of the Tea Party (14 to 13 percent). More telling, 73 percent of independents had no opinion on the movement. Tea Party endorsements of candidates would have little effect on these voters.

The good news for Republicans is that rejection of the Tea Party is not tantamount to a rejection of conservatism. Recent polls show that two-thirds of Americans are not satisfied with how American government works (Gallup) and 72 percent thought that big government was a greater threat than big business or big labor (Gallup). Voters consistently say that the country is on the wrong track by a greater than two-to-one margin (Rasmussen).

In the end, the Tea Party has not failed. The Tea Party, combined with the failure of President Obama’s agenda, moved the Republican Party to the right. National Journal called the current Congress the “most divided ever” with very few moderates left in either party. This is confirmed by a University of Georgia researcher whose research indicates that the Republican Party is at its most conservative point in 100 years.

There is still a place for the Tea Party within the Republican Party. As Michael Tanner noted in National Review, the Tea Party’s ability to field primary challengers against Republican incumbents will keep the GOP from moving too far toward the left. Even if the Tea Party never elects another candidate, by holding the feet of Republican incumbents to the fire, it has accomplished its purpose.

Read the full article on Elections Examiner

Republican Senate majority looms likely

Three months prior to the midterm congressional elections, polling is giving Republicans ample reason to be optimistic. Prominent political analysts estimate that enough Senate seats will change hands to create a Republican Senate majority. With new polls released on August 7, polling points toward a Republican Senate majority next year. August 7 also brought the revelation that a Democratic incumbent would withdraw from his reelection campaign.

As Examiner reported in March, a total of 36 Senate seats are up for reelection this year. Democrats are defending 21 seats and Republicans 15. The majority of these seats are safe for both parties, but 16 races are competitive enough to offer a challengers a chance. Republicans currently hold 45 seats in the Senate and would need to win an additional six seats to form a majority.

Alaska is still considered a tossup by both the Cook Political Report and Larry Sabato’s Crystal Ball, both respected political analysts. With the Republican primary not until August 19, two recent polls give Democratic incumbent Mark Begich a slight lead over two potential Republicans challengers. A Public Policy poll from August 7 showed Begich leading former Natural Resources Commissioner Dan Sullivan by four points. A second Public Policy poll put Begich ahead of former Lt. Gov. Mead Treadwell by three points. On July 28, a CBS poll showed Sullivan trailing Begich by 12 points and Treadwell trailing by two.

Public Policy found that Sullivan leads the primary polling with 35 percent. Treadwell is close behind at 29 percent, while 2010 Senate nominee Joe Miller is a distant third with 20 percent. The eventual nominee is likely to get a bump in the polls from his victory that may well boost him ahead of Sen. Begich.

Arkansas, another Democratic seat, is also a tossup. Incumbent Mark Pryor trailed Republican Tom Cotton by two points in a Public Policy poll from August 5.

Colorado leans Democrat according Larry Sabato, but is a tossup in Cook’s estimation. The most recent poll, by CBS, shows incumbent Mark Udall (D) with a narrow lead over Republican Cory Gardner.

Georgia is also a split decision with Sabato rating the seat of the retiring Saxby Chambliss as leaning Republican while Cook calls it a tossup. Two recent polls released on July 28 were also a split decision. CBS gave newly anointed Republican candidate David Perdue a six point lead over Democrat Michelle Nunn and Landmark Communications found a four point lead for Nunn. The race will likely start to solidify soon now that Republican nomination has finally been decided.

Iowa is considered a tossup by both analysts. Democratic Senator Tom Harkin is retiring, pitting Democrat Bruce Braley against Republican Joni Ernst. The July 28 CBS poll found a dead heat with Ernst leading by one point.

Kentucky is rated likely Republican by Sabato and a tossup by Cook. Nominally considered a safe seat, Republican incumbent Mitch McConnell was weakened by a tough primary challenge from a Tea Party candidate. A July 29 poll in the Courier Journal showed McConnell with a scant two point lead over Democrat Alison Lundergan Grimes. The CBS poll released one day earlier gave McConnell a four point lead.

Louisiana is yet another tossup. CBS found that Democratic incumbent Mary Landrieu trails Republican Bill Cassidy by one point.

Michigan is another split decision with Sabato calling the race a likely Democratic victory and Cook labeling it a tossup. The current senator, Carl Levin (D), is retiring. The most recent poll, by CBS, showed Republican Terry Lynn Land with a one point lead over Democrat Gary Peters.

Minnesota is a likely Democratic hold in the view of both analysts. Incumbent Al Franken leads likely Republican candidate Mike McFadden by 12 points in the CBS poll. The Minnesota primary will be held next week on August 12.

Mississippi is considered to be a probable Republican hold in spite of the bruising and still disputed primary campaign that left Republican incumbent Thad Cochran in the race. CBS found Cochran with a 14 point lead over Democrat Travis Childers. The wild card in this race is Cochran’s primary challenger, Chris McDaniel, who has still not conceded defeat and may challenge the primary results in court.

Montana is a likely Republican pickup according to both analysts. Democratic incumbent John Walsh trailed challenger Steve Daines by 16 points according to CBS and was unlikely to make up the deficit. He announced on August 7 that he was dropping out of the race in the midst of a scandal involving plagiarism in a 2007 research paper at the Army War College.

North Carolina is another tossup. Democratic incumbent Kay Hagan trails Republican Thom Tillis by five points in the most recent Rasmussen poll on August 7. A Civitas poll two days earlier showed Tillis with a two point lead and the CBS poll showed a one point Tillis lead. The race is still very close but is trending toward Tillis.

New Hampshire is rated as a Democratic hold by both analysts. Jeanne Shaheen, the incumbent, led former Massachusetts senator, Scott Brown, by 10 points according to CBS.

South Dakota is a second likely Republican pickup. Democrat Tim Johnson is retiring and Republican Mike Rounds is favored over Democrat Rick Weiland. There are no recent polls for this race.

Virginia is a likely Democratic hold. Incumbent Mike Warner leads former Republican National Committee chairman Ed Gillespie by 23 points in a Hampton University poll.

West Virginia is a third likely pickup for the GOP. CBS shows Republican Shelly Moore Capito leading Democrat Natalie Tennant by eight points. The seat is being vacated by Democrat Jay Rockefeller, who is retiring.

In the current analysis, Republicans will almost certainly flip three Senate seats from Democrat to Republican. These seats are in Montana, South Dakota, and West Virginia. In addition to these three seats, the GOP would need three more seats to win control of the Senate.

There are nine states still rated as tossups. Seven of these states are being defended by the Democrats, while only two are Republican. Currently, Republicans hold narrow leads in five of the Democratic tossups: Arkansas, Iowa, Louisiana, Michigan, and North Carolina. It is interesting to note that three of these states, Arkansas, Louisiana and North Carolina, voted for Mitt Romney in 2012, which may indicate an ideological change since the last Senate elections.

It is also interesting to note that several of the incumbent senators in tossup states were part of the class of 2009 that rode to victory on Barack Obama’s coattails. These senators include Mark Begich (D-Alaska), Mark Udall (D-Col.), and Kay Hagan (D-N.C.). With President Obama often polling with lower approval ratings than Democratic congressmen, he is unlikely to have coattails in 2014.

A final factor to consider is the rule of thumb that any incumbent who polls at less than 50 percent is in serious trouble. History has shown that undecided voters often, but not always, predominantly vote toward for challenger.

On the other side, only two seats are possible pickups for the Democrats. In Georgia, a tough primary season allowed Democrat Michelle Nunn to establish an early lead over the eventual Republican nominee, David Perdue. In Kentucky, a bitter campaign between Tea Party challenger and incumbent and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell left McConnell in a close race for the general election. Both of these races are likely to break for the Republicans.

In the end, whether the Republicans can successfully defend these two seats may well determine control of the Senate. It is a much easier proposition to win three tossup races than five. As Larry Sabato points out, Republicans have not beat more than two Democratic incumbents in any year since 1980. With the three likely pickups in Montana, South Dakota and West Virginia, the GOP is set to break a 30 year losing streak, but it will take more to win control of the Senate.

Many analysts believe that the GOP will overcome the odds. Sabato himself predicts a GOP pickup of between four and eight seats, which would put the chances of a Senate majority at approximately 50 percent. The comprehensive poll of Senate races by CBS also forecasted a 51-49 majority for the Republicans.

The Washington Post puts the odds even higher, giving the GOP an 82 percent chance of taking control of the Senate. The Post model calls for Republicans to win in Alaska, Arkansas, Georgia, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Montana, South Dakota, and West Virginia, a pickup of seven seats. Based on current polling and trends, Examiner agrees with this assessment and would also consider North Carolina a likely Republican pickup for a total gain of eight seats.

 

Read the full article on National Elections Examiner

Follow me on Facebook or Twitter

Tort Reform: The Mississippi Miracle

Tort reform has long been touted as a way to help reduce rising healthcare costs in the United States. Opponents belittle the effects of tort reform and claim that the right to bring almost unlimited lawsuits actually helps society by making products safer.

“Tort” is a legal term for a wrongful act that causes an injury to a person, their property, or their reputation. If a tort is committed, the injured person may be entitled to compensation. To obtain compensation, it is frequently necessary to file a lawsuit. The lawyers who represent plaintiffs in these lawsuits often work on a contingency basis, which means that they are paid a percentage of the money that the jury awards if they win the case.

Tort cases are a major source of income for personal injury lawyers. Consequently, the trial lawyers lobbying groups are major opponents of tort reform. Trial lawyers are second only to unions in providing contributions to the Democratic Party.

In 2004, the trial lawyers lost a major battle in Mississippi. Before 2004, Mississippi was a state known for frivolous lawsuits. Lawyers came from all around the country to file class action suits in Mississippi. Insurance companies were fleeing the state and those that remained were raising premiums or refusing to write policies. The US Chamber of Commerce rated Mississippi 50th in every judicial category. The state was referred to as “the jackpot justice capitol of America” and a “judicial hellhole.”

In 2004, Mississippi passed a tort reform package that resulted in a drastic change in the state’s legal landscape. After five years of political warfare, Mississippi’s legislature passed venue reform, which prevents lawyers from shopping for sympathetic courts, and limits on subjective and non-economic damages, such as pain and suffering. During the same period that tort reform was being passed, Mississippians also elected more judges that limited class action (multiple plaintiff) lawsuits and out-of-state plaintiffs.

The result was dramatic and rapid. Prior to the reform, medical malpractice rates had risen by 20-25%. Many doctors stopped practicing or moved out of state. Some areas were left without obstetricians within 100 miles. Since the reform, rates have not risen at all, and have even decreased by 30-45%. The number of medical malpractice suits has fallen by 90%.

Mississippi’s business-friendly climate has also attracted investment and jobs to the state. Approximately 60,000 new jobs have been created in the four years since the tort reform was passed compared to 30,000 jobs lost in four years before reform. Textron has invested $35 million and Kingsford Charcoal $20 million in the state. Winchester Ammunition returned to the state with a $3.5 million payroll. FedEx built a $1 billion dollar facility. Toyota even built a $1.2 billion, 200,000-worker plant. The Toyota plant is contingent on tort reform remaining the law of the land in Mississippi.

Overall, Mississippi is better off than before tort reform. Unemployment is down to 6% from a high of 9% prior to reform. In 2007, Mississippi’s per capita income growth was 6.7%. This places Mississippi third out of the fifty states.

Tort reform is a proven economic winner. Tragically, due to Democratic election victories in 2006, many states are repealing business-friendly laws and passing new laws, such as a patient bill of rights, that give people additional rights to sue. More lawsuits would have the effect of increasing costs to consumers and contributing to stagnant economic growth.

Tort reform is not about eliminating the right to sue. It is about eliminating outrageous damage awards and frivolous lawsuits. Tort reform does not prevent the recovery of legitimate damages, but it does prevent people from winning a legal lottery over a minor wrong. Tort reform prevents lawyers from looting a company of its hard-earned profits for a minor mistake or technicality.

The US legal system is estimated to cost each American family about $7,000 annually. One Mississippi CEO reported that his company saved $70,000 monthly on its legal bills after the passage of the reforms. Tort costs are spread through society by higher prices for consumer goods, higher insurance premiums, and more expensive health care. Tort reform in more states and at the federal level would save American families thousands of dollars and help to spur economic growth.

Sources:

http://www.opinionjournal.com/cc/?id=110007260
“Mississippi’s Tort Reform Triumph,” Wall Street Journal, May 10-11, 2008