Lately there has been a lot of Debate over the number of Democratic Congressional Districts that Democrats could gerrymander out of the state of Michigan if they had complete control (right now they hold the Governorship and State House. They stand a good chance at taking control of the State Senate while the Governor's race is a tossup). A few people, namely IHateBush, have said that it is possible to succesfully draw a map that would yield 12 Democratic seats and only 2 Republican seats. I've been trying for several weeks to draw a 12-2 map, meanwhile protecting endangered incumbents (specifically Schauer) and I've determined that a 12-2 map would be far overeaching and in a neutral or Republican leaning year might end up 9-5 or worse. I think the best Michigan Democrats could do is create 11 safe or Democrat leaning districts and 3 strongly Republican districts. I've drawn a map that I think does just that, although I still am not entirely confident that we could hold both of my "Thumb" districts in a Republican year. But without further ado, here's my map.
Grove Insight for DCCC (10/21, likely voters, 10/4-5):
Gary Peters (D): 46 (46)
Joe Knollenberg (R-inc): 36 (37)
Jack Kevorkian (I): 2 (n/a)
(MoE: ±4.9%)
Greenberg Quinlan Rosner for DCCC (10/19-20, likely voters, 9/30-10/1):
Mary Jo Kilroy (D): 44 (44)
Steve Stivers (R): 36 (36)
Don Eckhart (I): 11 (7)
(MoE: ±4.9%)
Two new polls from the DCCC show Democratic candidates in midwestern swing district races maintaining their sizable leads from last time. In the open seat in the Columbus-based 15th, the head-to-head numbers stay exactly the same; the only movement, unfortunately for Stivers, seems to be to pro-life independent Don Eckhart. (At the presidential level, Obama leads McCain 51-39 in OH-15.)
MI-09 continues to be a big surprise, as Gary Peters puts up a bigger margin against incumbent Joe Knollenberg than in the open seat in OH-15. This one just seems like a perfect storm: the Detroit area was already suffering economically more than any other part of the country, it's suffering even more with the financial crisis and subsequent free fall in the auto industry, and we have an old incumbent who hasn't faced a top-tier challenge before.
That's what currently pops up when you conduct a Google blog search for Knollenberg. If you click through to the actual article, Knollenberg has scrubbed his original title and replaced it with a new headline: "Protecting Our Families From Harmful Products".
This sort of thing -- especially coming from a United States congressman -- is disgusting.
Ordinarily, we don't talk about real estate too much at Swing State Project, but all of a sudden, people seem interested in the issue of officeholders not properly disclosing the true market value of your house on your federal disclosure forms.
So it's worth noting that Joe Knollenberg, currently embroiled in a tough race to retain his House seat in MI-09, may be in a little trouble himself. Roll Call has the details in an article pithily titled "Knollenberg Lowballs D.C. House:"
On the most recent disclosure forms, Knollenberg reported the value of the property at $50,000 to $100,000, down from the $100,000 to $250,000 range he reported the year before, despite the fact that District of Columbia tax records indicate a current assessed value of $781,840.
Anybody who's looked at Washington real estate lately knows that the idea of a $50,000 townhouse on Capitol Hill (four blocks from the Capitol) is pretty laughable.
It's a little subtler than that: Congressional reporting rules don't require you to give the value of a personal residence, or a mortgage against it... unless there is rental income involved. Knollenberg purchased the townhouse in 2001 (for $490,000), but didn't start renting the basement apartment unit until 2003. At that point:
His disclosure form for that year reported a "lower level rental" valued from $100,000 to $250,000, generating $5,000 to $15,000 in rent. Knollenberg also reported a mortgage on the property of $100,000 to $250,000.
He reported the value of the basement unit alone, despite:
The instruction manual provided by the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct for filling out financial disclosure forms requires that when a property provides rental income, "the gross value of the entire property should be reported even if only part of the property (e.g. the basement of a residence) is used for rental purposes."
However, something changed with his 2007 report, and there's no explanation for it coming from the Knollenberg camp other than 'clerical error:'
But on his 2007 disclosure form, filed in May, Knollenberg reported the value of the property at between $50,000 and $100,000, claimed income of $5,000-$15,000 on the rental and no longer listed the mortgage on the property at all. By comparison, one local developer said an indoor parking space in a Capitol Hill condo building would sell for about $40,000.
Bear in mind that no one is talking about criminal charges at this point, only violations of House ethics rules. But with the Stevens story bursting onto the scene, this little 'clerical error' can't be helping Knollenberg, already facing a rocky re-election bid.
The end of the first quarter brings news that bodes well for Democrats in Michigan. Congressional challengers Mark Schauer (MI-07) and Gary Peters (MI-09), both considered top contenders on the Red-To-Blue list, have ended the quarter with impressive fundraising totals.
Peters' campaign reports that it raised over $346,000 for the first quarter, reaching roughly $748,000 total for the cycle. Furthermore, in sharp contrast to the GOP's reliance on large-scale wealthy donors and multinational corporations, 90% of Peters' donations came from within the Wolverine State, and 94% came from individuals. Nearly 2,000 individual contributors signed on by the end of the quarter, reinforcing the growing power of small donations from individuals via the Internet, a trend that will undoubtedly shape elections going forward.
Schauer's numbers reflect a similar trend, as his campaign announced that it has raised more than $326,000 in the quarter, and more than $900,000 total to date. 86% of that total came from in-state donors, and, during this quarter, the campaign saw 1,000 new individuals contribute.
Always encouraging to hear news like this, especially from districts in a crucial swing state!
In a shocking development, Nancy Skinner, the 2006 candidate who ran against Republican Rep. Joe Knollenberg, has withdrawn her candidacy for that seat. She would have faced state lottery commissioner Gary Peters in the Democratic primary before moving on to face Knollenberg in the fall.
I'm not quite sure which way this news cuts. On the one hand, Skinner ran a strong race against Knollenberg the last time around, and has been championed by the netroots, especially Democracy For America. On the flip side, I remain wary of "grudge match" candidates who were unable to beat the Republicans in 2006. That was a Democratic year, without any GOP pull at the top of the ticket. If a candidate couldn't make it over the finish line then, how would he or she do so this year?
I also don't know much about Gary Peters. How strong a candidate is he? Any Michiganders with insights, I encourage you to chime in!
Peters for Congress is proud to announce that the entire Michigan Democratic delegation will be supporting a December fundraiser for Gary Peters and Mark Schauer. The event comes weeks before the next crucial campaign finance reporting deadline.
You may have seen some of the YouTube drama surrounding MI-09 and candidate Gary Peters. Peters is currently serving as the Griffin Endowed Chair of American Government at Central Michigan University. As a former State Senator, State Lottery Commissioner, and Lt. Commander in the Navy Reserve he brings a unique perspective to the university.
Another unique perspective found at CMU belongs to young conservative Dennis Lennox. Lennox has been complaining that Peters should not be able to run for Congress at teach at CMU at the same time.
The root of his complaint poses a very significant question: should you be able to hold a job and run for office? We don't mind that incumbents, who earn a salary from the taxpayers, campaign for their re-election. Should a candidate have to be independently wealthy to run for office?
On Tuesday, the League of Conservation Voters named the first two members of the "Dirty Dozen" list of the 12 worst members of Congress on environmental issues.
The first additions to the 2008 Dirty Dozen are Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) and Congressman Joe Knollenberg (R-MI09).
We all know where Inhofe stands on the environment. If you can justify ignoring the threat of global warming by claiming it is a scam to raise the Weather Channel's ratings, then you can justify voting against any environmental protections. However, I was very glad to see the LCV recognize that Joe Knollenberg is in the same class as Inhofe.
You may not have heard of Joe Knollenberg. He is the Republican Ranking Member of an Appropriations Sub Committee, and brags about all the money he has "secured" for local interests, taking advantage of earmarks, on his website. But his record on issues important to 9th district voters is atrocious. The LCV gives him a lifetime score of just 7%.
In fact, an amendment that bans the EPA from hosting educational seminars about global warming is known as the "Knollenberg Amendment".
