The DSCC is now spending money on behalf of Arlen Specter in the Pennsylvania primary (emphasis mine):
The DSCC is spending a significant amount of money to ensure a former GOP Sen. Arlen Specter (D-PA) wins his May 18 primary, sources with knowledge of the move tell Hotline OnCall.
One source said the DSCC is using coordinated funds to help Specter keep a robust TV presence. Ads that tout Specter's candidacy now say they are paid for by the DSCC; last week, the disclaimers on the same ads indicated Specter's campaign had paid for them.
All told, Specter and the DSCC spent about $407K on the joint ad buy last week. A second source said the DSCC's contribution is about three-quarters of that amount, or around $300K.
There is nothing particularly unusual about the DSCC spending money, even in a primary, to help an incumbent Democratic Senator. Incumbent protection is one of the stated goals of the DSCC. They are supporting Blanche Lincoln and Micheal Bennet in their contested primaries, as well.
However, even in campaigns without incumbents, the DSCC also stepping into Democratic primaries, and doing so consistently on behalf of the more conservative candidate. Examples here include DSCC support of Cal Cunningham over Elaine Marshall in North Carolina, and Lee Fisher over Jennifer Brunner in Ohio.
There are few Democratic Senate primaries in 2009-2010 where the DSCC has not taken sides. Illinois, Massachusetts, and Kentucky are the only examples that come to mind. Admittedly, it might have been a good idea for the DSCC to step in, even on behalf of more conservative candidates, in Illinois and Massachusetts.
Now, it is doubtful that there is any nefarious, anti-progressive plot coming from the DSCC. Every indication from them over the years is that they back all incumbents and, in non-incumbent campaigns, whichever candidate they think has the best chance of winning. Also, freshman Democratic Senators are actually slightly to the left of the caucus as a whole, showing that in the very recent past the DSCC has not had a problem backing progressive candidates.
However, what these endorsements may well show is that being conservative--both in ideology and demographic profile--is part of the current DSCC leadership's view of what makes for a more electable candidate. This is especially the case in North Carolina. Secretary of State Elaine Marshall seems to have exactly the profile a Democratic candidate needs to win in 2010: elected to statewide office three times, and a record fighting both Wall Street and lobbyists. And yet, despite that, the DSCC kept fishing around for other candidates who fit models of elections past. As though it was 1996, they went after Blue Dogs Heath Shuler and Bob Ethridge (who declined). As though it was 2006, they went after former State Senator and Iraq war veteran Cal Cunningham (who declined and then accepted). Perhaps the DSCC would cite Marshall's poor performance in the 2002 Democratic primary as a reason not to support her, but that wouldn't jibe with their support of Lee Fisher in Ohio. Fisher lost a statewide campaign in 1998 and hasn't run for office since then. Marshall, by contrast, has won statewide office multiple times since her defeat, and was was ahead in the primary before the DSCC recruited Cunningham.
Even if the DSCC's rationale for intervention in all of these campaigns has nothing to do with ideology, it certainly doesn't look good that they consistently intervene in primaries on behalf of more conservative candidates. When they even get to the point of actively recruiting conservative candidates to run against progressives who hold statewide office when no conservatives have announced on their own, it looks really bad. It would be nice to be thrown a bone every once and while, and for the DSCC to intervene in a primary on behalf of a progressive. Appearances mater, and progs need to know they are desired in the coalition for more than just their money.
We will be live blogging North Carolina primary returns this evening, starting at 7:30 pm when polls close.
|
