Watch out for switch-hitters

September 20, 2006

Chances are, the nation will wake up on Nov. 8 and know whether Democrats or Republicans control Congress, most notably the House. If Dems get a net gain of 15 seats or more, Nancy Pelosi becomes Speaker.

That is, as long as no one starts switching sides unexpectedly.

With House Democrats expecting to narrow their 15-seat gap with Republicans in November, members of both parties are considering the uncomfortable but all-too-plausible reality that control of the House could hinge on the party affiliation of just a few members — or perhaps only one.

Such a scenario puts additional pressure on the moderates on each side of the aisle — many of whom could face pressure to jump across and join the other team.

The Hill didn’t point to any specific members who are rumored to be on the move to the other side of the aisle, but just raised the prospect and said “pressure could mount after the election. In a House divided 218 to 217, just a single disgruntled member of the majority could deal the ultimate blow to his or her colleagues.” Scary thought.

There are a few suspects to keep an eye on.

Republicans have periodically courted Democratic Reps. Bud Cramer (Ala.) and Colin Peterson (Minn.) and former Rep. Ken Lucas (D-Ky.), now a Democratic candidate. They also are among the most likely to buck their leaders on votes.

Cramer voted with his party only 60 percent of the time in 2005, reportedly second only to freshman Rep. Dan Boren (D-Okla.) at 59 percent. Peterson sided with Democrats 64 percent of the time, followed by Rep. Gene Taylor (D-Miss.) at 65 percent, Rep. Lincoln Davis (D-Tenn.) at 67 percent and Utahan Rep. Jim Matheson (D) at 69 percent.

It may be wishful thinking, but I find it hard to imagine any of these guys jumping to the GOP after November. They’ve all been in Congress — and in the party — for many years. If they were going to become Republicans, they’d have done so already.

Indeed, doesn’t it seem far more likely the Dems might pick up some Republicans? If Dems win back the chamber for the first time in 12 years, and start offering some plum committee assignments to not-quite-conservative lawmakers like Rep. Jim Leach (R-Iowa) — lawmakers who have grown accustomed to being in the majority and who may want to stay there — couldn’t the Dems pad their majority a bit by picking up what’s left of the GOP’s moderates?

The best scenario would be such an overwhelming victory that no defections would be needed, but we’ll have to wait and see how it plays out. At this point, whatever it takes to restore sanity and integrity to the government is ok by me.

  • Well do you have stats on the number of Congressmen/women who have switched parties in the past? And line those stats against a column on whether they were re-elected after the switch? That should be interesting to see.

    My hunch is that very few turncoats get re-elected. Which would be a dis-incentive to switch. But I won’t speak before I see statistics.

  • Several Dems switched after the Gingrich takeover, if I remember right. Much more likely for rats to leave a sinking ship, rather than climb on board.

    Unless, of course, the whole system is so corrupt that the Lieberman’s in waiting will switch when they need to keep our parliament intact.

  • Lots of “turncoats” get reelected – Sen. Shelby of Alabama, former Sen. Campbell of Colorado, the late Strom Thurmond, Rep. Deal of Georgia, Rep. Stump of Arizona, former Rep. Tauzin or Louisiana. True, some do get defeated (like former Rep. Michael Forbes from Long Island – who unlike those listed above was switching away from the GOP). But switching parties doesn’t necessarily end your career – often it hasn’t.

  • Democrat Ned Lamont calls rival Sen. Joe Lieberman a “turncoat” in his latest ad.

    I guess there’s one in the Senate already!

  • Politicians are good at reading tea leaves and it makes me think almost nobody in the House would switch, unless there was a crushing win by one side or another.

    But, if the House is so close that a few switcheroos can keep the Republicans in power, are Democrats really going to want to switch to Republican for what might be a fleeting majority?

    As for the Senate, anything is possible there. Keep an eye on Lieberman if he gets reelected.

  • Democrat Willie Brown’s last term as Speaker of the California Assembly he needed one Republican Assemblyman to vote for him as Speaker. Ever the opportunist, Willie looked down the list of Republican Assemblymen and found the one who owed the most money (from his campaign). Willie paid that bill and got the Republican’s vote and one more term as Speaker.

  • Hmmm….If the situaton was reversed I would say this story wa sa Rovian tactic to drive up GOP support by suggesting winning a majority is not enough. Is is possible the DCCC is going Rove and hoping to drive more support to Dems in an effort to put more than a one or two seat majority in the house?

  • Willie Brown was elected California Speaker in 1980 on the votes of Republicans, despite a big majority of Democrats in that chamber. But the Democrats split between 3 candidates.

    In 1994, the Republican who voted for Brown was Paul Horcher. Shortly after Willie was elected SF mayor, Horcher got a nice position in SF government. Horcher had recently lost his conservative seat in Orange County –hmm, I wonder why? ;o)

  • Ah, back to California in 1994-1996.

    Brown-D gets reelected speaker of Assembly despite a bare one seat majority by Republicans. Knowing once Republicans organize they will vote him out, he strikes a deal that makes Doris Allen and later Brian Sentencich speaker of the Assembly –though Brown and the Democrats essentially control them. It takes Republicans a full year after getting their majority to actually control the Assembly thanks to Willie Brown’s maneuvering and Republicans never controlled the Assembly until Brown left to become SF mayor in 1996.

    The Republicans that Brown struck deals with, Horcher (recalled in 1995), Allen (recalled) and Sentencich (lost GOP primary) –their careers ended.

    Brown ever the strategist, learned the lesson early that a few Republicans were much more key to being successful than all the Democrats.

    The only Democratic strategist with this kind of talent is probably Harry Reid. Everyone should note that with 45 votes, our Senate still only nominally produces Republican products and that’s thanks to Reid’s maneuvering.

  • Watching Willie Brown play the Republicans in 1995-96 was one of the most amusing political events I have seen in a long time. Further proof if proof was necessary that “Republican” is a synonym for “brain-dead moron.” And all they could do was go running, crying “Mom-meeee! Willie Brown’s not doing nice things!! Mom-meeeeee!!!”

  • The Republicans simply have never bested Willie Brown and in 1994, with their 41-39 majority in the Assembly, they thought they had. Shrewd
    Willie realized one of their votes was Richard Mountjoy who was just elected to the Senate, and got a ruling that Mountjoy couldn’t vote on this. Then he got Horcher to switch parties, and he kept all 39 Democrats together on this. When Horcher was recalled, he simply needed to find one Republican to become speaker using all Democratic votes (and that Republican) and he found one and then when she was ousted, he found another. And then Brown left for SF. The Republicans never got him.

    In fact, the SF Republican party endorsed his reelection in 1999.

    Fascinating man to watch, fedora and all. The Democrats need to breed this type of political skill to be successful in the current environment.

  • Maybe we need Willie to work with Howard Dean. I listen to Willie on the radio every morning while I am driving to work, and that man is smart. He woulld still be running Sacramento if he hadn’t been term limited out. I think the Republicans invented the idea of term limits just because of Willie Brown.

  • Ken Lucas is coming back out of retirement to run for his old seat because he’s so disgusted with Geoff Davis and the general direction of the congress. He’s not likely to get any more liberal than he was before if he wins, but I’d be stunned if he switched sides.

    • Comments are closed.