This one's from Roll Call:
The National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) on Thursday will name 15 more Members to its “Patriot” program to boost the party’s most vulnerable incumbents in 2010, bringing its membership to 25...
According to a list obtained by Roll Call, the 15 new Members named to the program are: Mike Rogers (Ala.), Mary Bono Mack (Calif.), Bill Posey (Fla.), Tom Rooney (Fla.), Mario Diaz-Balart (Fla.), Lynn Jenkins (Kan.), John Fleming (La.), Bill Cassidy (La.), Michele Bachmann (Minn.), Blaine Luetkemeyer (Mo.), Lee Terry (Neb.), Scott Garrett (N.J.), Dean Heller (Nev.), Charlie Dent (Pa.) and Cynthia Lummis (Wyo.).
I don't know about the other legsilators, but it's kind of amazing that after nearly two terms in office--Michele's *still* on the list of the most vulnerable Republicans.
Do you remember a million years ago, when Republicans and conservatives tirelessly argued for term limits on the grounds that incumbents have an unfair and overwhelming advantage? And that should be especially true for Michele Bachmann, a Republican conservative running in what is perhaps the most conservative district in Minnesota. In theory, she should be practically invulnerable. Her district, as currently drawn, has never been won by a Democrat and the voting demographic heavily favors Republican conservative candidates.
So why is Michele chronically on the critical list, begging for more help and more money when--in terms of voter demographics--she should have one of the safest Republican seats in the country?
Well, she's probably chronically vulnerable because:
1. --after ten years in government, she hasn't delivered any major legislative victories for conservative supporters, or anyone else. (She hasn't repealed any legislation that conservatives find obnoxious, and she hasn't created any legislation that would build popular support for her in her district.)
2. --up til now, she's made a big deal out of not seeking earmark spending for her district. Earmark spending (on important, necessary projects) is an important way of shoring up the local economy during economic times of trouble--not only does it keep infrastructure in repair, it can provide jobs and stimulate the district's economy when the private sector's in a slump.
3. --and the private sector *is* in a slump in Michele's Sixth District. Last time we checked, the Sixth had the highest home foreclosure rate in the state. Michele hasn't done anything to change that awful statistic.
4. --and she abandoned her much-touted, much publicized pledge not to seek or accept earmark spending for the district. That can't please conservatives who really do think earmark spending is a pernicious waste of tax dollars. And it can't please the other voters and families in the district, because that means that Michele passed up a lot of needed earmark money for the district all along--just so she could do as much conservative grandstanding as possible.
5.--and Michele has developed a national reputation as perhaps the foremost nut in American government--a publicity junkie more notorious for what she says, than anything she's done for the voters and families in her district.
So there's at least five reasons why a conservative Republican legislator is chronically vulnerable when it comes to keeping a seat in a conservative Republican district. Perhaps you can think of other reasons.
http://dumpbachmann.blogspot.com/2009/07/bachmann-on-list-of-most-vulnerable.html