By: Michael Barone

Republican Honolulu Councilman Charles Djou has won the special election in the 1st congressional district of Hawaii, the birthplace and childhood home of Barack Obama, with 40% of the vote, to 31% for state Senator Colleen Hanabusa and 28% for former 2nd district Congressman Ed Case, both Democrats. The Djou percentage is different from that widely reported, because I don’t count blank votes and over votes in the total as the Hawaii authorities do. Under Hawaii law, there was no primary in this special election; candidates of all parties ran with the leading votegetter elected. This was obviouslty an advantage for Djou, the only well-known Republican in the race. Democrats were split between state Hanabusa, a pillar of the Democratic machine led most of the last 50 years by Senator Daniel Inouye, and Case, elected to Congress after the death of incumbent Patsy Mink in September 2002 and reelected n 2004. In 2006 Case ran against the then 86-year-old Senator Daniel Akaka in the Democratic primary, which was considered lese majeste by the machine (amazingly enough, Senators Inouye and Akaka were born within four days of each other in September 1924); Akaka won 55%-45%. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and the Obama White House reportedly favored Case over Hanabusa in this contest, presumably on the theory that his reputation as a reformer and moderate would make him a stronger candidate. But Inouye and company insisted on supporting Hanabusa and the DCCC pulled out of the race during the mail-in voting period, when a poll suggested that Djou was leading.

There’s an important backstory here: the efforts of an independent expenditure by a group called http://iwvoice.org/ Independent Women’s Voice. IWV commissioned a poll in the race in April, which showed Case leading and Djou within reach. In response IWV started running three ads prepared by the Brabender Cox firm, one charging that Case had voted 72 times for higher taxes, one charging that he had gotten an “F” rating from the National Taxpayers Union and one noting that he had hired a former consultant to former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich (“Advisor B” on the FBI surveillance tapes). When these ads appeared, the Djou campaign stopped running negative spots and ran one showing Djou’s wife talking to camera instead. Subsequent polling for IWV showed Case’s negatives rising, and to the surprise of many he ended up running behind Hanabusa and far behind Djou.

This leaves Djou about as well positioned for the general election as a Republican could be. Yes, his 40% is well below the 50% needed to win a contest against the single nominee of the Democratic party. But it’s likely that Djou was the second choice of many who voted for Ed Case, which would position him well if Hanabusa is the Democratic nominee. And if Case is the Democratic nominee, his negatives are now much higher than they were at the beginning of the special election campaign.

It’s been noted by others that although Hawaii 1 voted for native son Barack Obama by a 70%-28% margin, it has not always been so heavily Democratic: it voted 53%-47% for John Kerry in 2004 and 55%-39% for Al Gore in 2000. In its 50 years as a state, Hawaii has shown two basic political characteristics: it tends to favor Democrats and it tends to favor incumbents. (Hawaii has only two congressional districts, with the 1st typically slightly more Republican than the 2nd, so statewide figures here are relevant). In the 13 presidential elections in which it has participated starting in 1960, it has voted an average of 54% Democratic and 42% Democratic. It voted heavily for incumbent Democratic Presidents Johnson (79%-21%) and Clinton (57%-32%) and was one of the six states voting for incumbent Democratic President Carter (45%-43%). It voted solidly for incumbent Republican Presidents Nixon (62%-38%) and Reagan (55%-44%) and cast pretty strong minority votes for incumbent Republican Presidents Ford (48%-51%) and George W. Bush (45%-54%). Only incumbent Republican George H. W. Bush was soundly defeated (37%-48%).

In addition, Hawaii has never voted against reelecting an incumbent member of Congress—a record shared, I believe, by no other state. Before last Saturday, 12 individuals had been elected to Congress from Hawaii, two Republicans and 10 Democrats. They are listed below, with their political fates; Hawaii elected only one member of the House in 1959 and 1960.

Hiram Fong (R), elected to the Senate in 1959, reelected in 1964 and 1970, retired 1976.

Oren Long (D), elected to the Senate in 1959, retired in 1962.

Daniel Inouye (D), elected to the House in 1959, reelected in 1960, elected to the Senate in 1962, reelected in 1968, 1974, 1980, 1986, 1992, 1998, 2004, still serving and running for reelection in 2010.

Spark Matsunaga (D), elected to the House in 1962, reelected in 1964, 1966, 1968, 1970, 1972, 1974, elected to the Senate in 1976, reelected in 1982, 1988, died in April 1990.

Tom Gill (D), elected to the House in 1962, ran unsuccessfully for the Senate in 1964.

Patsy Mink (D), elected to the House in 1964, reelected in 1966, 1968, 1970, 1972, 1974, ran unsuccessfully for the Senate in 1976, elected to the House in 1990, reelected in 1992, 1994, 1996, 1998, 2000 and, though she died in September 2002, in 2002.

Cecil Heftel (D), elected to the House 1976, reelected in 1978, 1980, 1982, 1984, resigned to run unsuccessfully for governor in 1986.

Daniel Akaka (D), elected to the House in 1976, reelected in 1978, 1980, 1982, 1984, 1986, 1988, elected to the Senate in 1990, reelected in 1994, 2000, 2006, still serving.

Neil Abercrombie (D), elected to the House in September 1986 special election, defeated simultaneously for the Democratic nomination for the full term 1986, elected to the House in 1990, reelected in 1992, 1994, 1996, 1998, 2000, 2002, 2004, 2006, 2008, resigned in February 2010 to run for governor. Abercrombie lost the September 1986 primary to Mufi Hannemann, now Mayor of Honolulu, by a 40%-39% margin, but he was not an incumbent then since the special election was held the same day as the primary; Hannemman lost the general election to Republican Pat Saiki by a 59%-37% margin.

Pat Saiki (R), elected to the House in 1986, reelected in 1988, ran unsuccessfully for the Senate in 1990.

Ed Case (D), elected to the House in special elections on November 30, 2002, and in January 2003, reelected in 2004, ran unsuccessfully for senator 2006.

Mazie Hirono (D), elected to the House in 2006, reelected in 2008, still serving.

The closest precedent to the situation in Hawaii 1 today was the 1986 race for the same seat, which featured both a special election and a divisive Democratic primary and resulted in a Republican victory in November. That divisiveness presumably contributed to the poor showing of Democratic nominee Mufi Hannemann in November. That looks like a good omen for Charles Djou.

Read more at the Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Will-new-Republican-congressman-hold-Obamas-home-district-94777124.html#ixzz0oxJFvLB6

John Fund

Democrats are frustrated that they may lose a special House election on May 22 in the most unlikely of places — the Hawaii congressional district where President Obama was born in 1961 and which he won with an overwhelming 70% of the vote just a year and a half ago.

The rules for the special election for the seat vacated by Democrat Neil Abercrombie provide for a single election with no primaries. That means all candidates run on one ballot and the top vote-getter wins even if he or she only has a plurality. Currently, polls how Republican Charles Djou, a member of Honolulu’s City Council, leading former Democratic Congressman Ed Case and State Senate President Colleen Hanabusa. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee tried valiantly to convince Ms. Hanabusa to drop out, but met resistance from Democratic U.S. Senators Dan Inouye and Dan Akaka, who are still furious at Mr. Case for daring to mount a primary challenge against Mr. Akaka in 2006.

After spending $243,000 in TV ads attacking Mr. Djou, the DCCC has apparently concluded the fusillade has not slowed his momentum. So the group has decided to conserve its resources and is pulling out of further ad campaigns. Roll Call, the Capitol Hill newspaper, says that the DCCC move amounts to “effectively ceding the race to the Republicans.” The thinking of key Democrats apparently is that should Mr. Djou win the special election this month, he will be much easier to defeat next November when he must run for a full two-year term against a single Democrat.

One of the factors boosting Mr. Djou’s chances has been a flood of independent expenditures that have eroded Mr. Case’s image as a “moderate” Democrat. Independent Women’s Voice, a conservative group, has been running ads noting that Mr. Case had voted to raise taxes 72 times and had received failing grades from anti-pork barrel spending groups such as the National Taxpayers Union.

A GOP victory in President Obama’s native state would be a psychological blow to Democrats, still reeling from their loss of Ted Kennedy’s Senate seat in Massachusetts in January. For Democrats who were confident that passing health care would brighten the political atmosphere for them this fall, the forecast is for continued turbulence.

– John Fund

SomeAreMoreEqual.com Goes Live!

(WASHINGTON, DC) – Independent Women’s Voice CEO Heather Higgins today announced the launch of SomeAreMoreEqual.com, a web site designed to draw attention to the so-called “Leadership and Committee Staff Carve-Out” provision exempting key congressional staffers from some of the requirements of the health spending bill signed into law just yesterday.

“In our Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson wrote that ‘All men are created equal,’” said Higgins. “What he meant by that was that all men and women are to be treated equally under the law. That’s a lesson certain congressional staffers – to wit, the Leadership and Committee staffers who wrote the health spending bill signed into law yesterday – would do well to remember. Apparently, they must have forgotten Jefferson’s axiom – they wrote the bill in such a way as to exempt themselves from some of the requirements imposed upon other congressional staffers, and, in fact, Members of Congress.

“That’s unconscionable. The Leadership and Committee staff members who wrote this exemption into the legislation are acting like the pigs in George Orwell’s ‘Animal Farm,’ where the motto was ‘All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.’

“Later today, Sen. Grassley will offer an amendment to remove this particularly odious provision. Independent Women’s Voice strongly supports Sen. Grassley’s effort to remove this offensive carve-out, and, to that end, we have created a new web site – http://SomeAreMoreEqual.com — to draw attention to this special exemption.

“We have no doubt that as the daysand weeks continue, we will continue to learn, in Speaker Pelosi’s memorable phrase, ‘just what’s in the bill.’”

# # # # #

“Liberal” Blog Ad Network Refuses To Advertise
SpeakerPelosiHatesThis.com

(WASHINGTON, March 20) –The Liberal Blog Advertising Network http://web.blogads.com/advertise/liberal_blog_advertising_network refused today to sell online banner ad space intended to drive traffic to http://SpeakerPelosiHatesThis.com, a lighthearted, inoffensive, helpful reminder to the staffs of Members whose vote will likely cost them their jobs this fall. 

“Not for a long time have I made the mistake of thinking that ‘liberal’ necessarily translates as ‘open-minded,’ said Heather Higgins, President and CEO of Independent Women’s Voice.  “Nor that it guaranteed having a sense of humor.  Nevertheless, the decision by the Liberal Blog Advertising Network to refuse to sell online ad space to Independent Women’s Voice simply because they apparently do not like the content of our advertising is, in a word, disappointing. I wanted very much for our ads ‘to reach the influential people who forge the national progressive zeitgeist,’ and I was assured by their web page that this was the way to reach these ‘online hyper-influentials.’

“It’s disappointing that the Liberal Blog Advertising Network has chosen to censor our advertising so as not to upset their apparently hyper-delicate sensibilities.  We trust more unbiased outlets, which appreciate free speech and can distinguish between an alternate point of view and an offensive one, will not be so threatened.”

“If they’d like to see what the fuss is about, all they have to do is type http://SpeakerPelosiHatesThis.com into their browser and they’ll see what kind of help we are trying to offer staffers of House Democrats who make the mistake of voting YES on the health care bill currently before the Congress.”

Independent Women’s Voice, a 501(c) (4) non-partisan charitable organization, recently surveyed 35 targeted House districts. Results of the survey can be found online here: http://iwvoice.org/iwv-poll-of-35-key-swing-districts/

IWV President and CEO, Heather Higgins discusses Tranparency and FOAAs on FOX News

The survey released by the Polling Company and Independent Women’s Voice polled 1,200 registered voters in 35 districts represented by pivotal House members who could determine the outcome of the healthcare debate.

82 percent of voters in those “swing districts” regard the healthcare bill as either the top or one of the top three issues for deciding whom to support for Congress next November.  60 percent want Congress to start from scratch on a bipartisan healthcare reform proposal or stop working on it this year.

Majorities feel the legislation will make them and their loved ones, the economy and the U.S. healthcare system worse off.

Julie Gunlock, a senior fellow at the Independent Women’s Forum, says the findings of the poll show that constituents in the 35 swing districts are paying attention.

“They’re paying attention to the issue, and they’re going to pay attention to how their members vote,” she comments. “This is not about a lack of information – people are focused on healthcare, they’re focused on this debate and they’ve really educated themselves.  The reaction is clear – people do not want this particular package of healthcare reform.  They don’t want Obama healthcare, and they’re going to be watching how these members vote.”

The survey also found that three in four voters disagree that the federal government should mandate that everyone buy a government-approved insurance plan, and 81 percent believe any reform should focus first on reducing costs.

Congressional districts surveyed include: AR-01, AR-04, AZ-08, CA-18, CO-03, CO-04, IL-14, IN-08, IN-09, KY-06, MI-07, NC-07, NC-11, ND-At Large, NJ-03, NM-02, NV-03, NY-24, NY-20, OH-01, OH-06, OH-15, OH-16, OH-18, PA-03, PA-04, PA-08, PA-10, TN-06, TX-17, VA-02, VA-05, VA-09, WA-03, WI-08.

National polls don’t capture the demographics or sentiment of these districts.  Respondents from these districts self-identify as 40% Republican v. 32% Democrat, 90% have insurance, 71% are married, and 48% self-identify as conservative.  They have paid attention to the heath care debate (73% saw at least some of the summit) – and 55% say that what they’ve seen and heard lately have left them less supportive of the legislation, while 60% say “start over with a bipartisan plan” or “stop working on health care altogether.”

Indeed, they massively reject the individual aspects of health care reform. Many national polls have only asked about BENEFITS PROVIDED BY THE PLAN without asking about the costs and consequences they entail.  That’s like asking how many kids want ice cream at recess, without mentioning that their allowance for the year will be taken in exchange and the principal gets to choose the flavor. This poll put the individual aspects in context.

Most important, critical masses of voters say they will actually support their Member of Congress this November if that Member opposes the bill.  Voters will hold Members accountable for process as well as content: 63% don’t think a Member should vote for a reconciliation package unless they mean for the Senate bill, as is, to become law.

Nearly seven in ten voters also feel that health care is distracting Congress from bigger priorities, like jobs.

Independent Women’s Voice is a 501(c) (4) nonpartisan, nonprofit organization for women, men and families. IWV is dedicated to promoting limited government, free markets, and personal responsibility.

###

Who:

• Heather Higgins, President and CEO, Independent Women’s Voice
• Michelle Bernard, Director, Independent Women’s Voice
• Kellyanne Conway, President and CEO of the polling company™, inc./ WomanTrend

What: Conference call to discuss and answer questions about the IWV health care poll

When: Monday, March 15, Noon ET

Call-in: 1-888-732-6202, Passcode: 117006

The full poll will be posted Monday, March 15 at 11am ET on the IWV website (www.iwvoices.org).

Congressional districts surveyed include: AR-01, AR-04, AZ-08, CA-18, CO-03, CO-04, IL-14, IN-08, IN-09, KY-06, MI-07, NC-07, NC-11, ND-At Large, NJ-03, NM-02, NV-03, NY-24, NY-20, OH-01, OH-06, OH-15, OH-16, OH-18, PA-03, PA-04, PA-08, PA-10, TN-06, TX-17, VA-02, VA-05, VA-09, WA-03, WI-08.

Independent Women’s Voice is a 501(c)(4) nonpartisan, nonprofit organization for women, men and families. IWV is dedicated to promoting limited government, free markets, and personal responsibility.

Congress.org

By Ambreen Ali

Activists are getting ready for the final showdown on health care.

As Democrats renew their push on health care this week, advocacy groups on both sides have stepped up their efforts to energize their bases and influence lawmakers.

President Obama’s health care plan — released ahead of Thursday’s bipartisan health summit   — resembles the Senate bill (HR 3590) with a few concessions that could get House Democrats to pass the overhaul with a simple majority.

That strategy gives Democrats an advantage, since they hold the majority in both chambers.

But opponents of the overhaul are doing everything they can to ensure that won’t happen. They have started e-mail, robocall, and advertising campaigns telling members to pressure lawmakers against the President’s plan.

“We’re trying to go gangbusters this week,” said Carrie Lukas of Independent Women’s Voice. The conservative group has been using radio ads and phone campaigns to target specific Congressional districts.

“There’s a lot of Members of the House who have to be nervous about making this leap,” Lukas said, noting that some Democrats are nervous about midterm elections after Sen. Scott Brown (R-Mass.) won in Massachusetts.

The House health care bill (HR 3962) passed by five votes, 220-215. The conservative groups are trying to identify the handful of Representatives who may be easiest to peel away from the majority.

Americans for Tax Reform has been using the plan’s tax provisions to sway lawmakers against the bill. The group said the President’s proposal includes a net tax hike of $748 billion over the next decade.

“We’re going to try to make Members profoundly uncomfortable if they were going to vote for it,” Tax Policy Director Ryan Ellis said.

The group used similar analyses of the House and Senate bills to lobby lawmakers, making them well prepared for what Ellis called the “the third round.”

But it also works to the activists’ disadvantage that the health care debate has dragged. Grassroots bases that were energized around health care last year have waned over time.

“We’re trying to bring the energy level and engagement level of our activists back up to where it was last year,” Phil Kerpen, a spokesman for Americans for Prosperity, said.

The group is holding a counter-event to the health summit to get some of that excitement back.

“We’re likely near the end one way or the other,” Kerpen said. “Either they’ll succeed in getting something very unpopular through or they’ll move on.”

As for the summit itself, some groups are adopting a wait-and-see approach.

The Chamber of Commerce, a powerful opponent of the Democrats’ proposals, sent the President a letter yesterday asking him to drop the House and Senate bills in favor of “a fresh approach.”

Others, including the Conservatives for Patients’ Rights, have already written it off the event as “kabuki.”

“This is a last-ditch effort by the President to restart the debate and take hold of the narrative,” spokesman Brian Burgess said.

The group has been targeting the public option through radio and television ads that ask voters to get in touch with lawmakers. It’s a “trickle-up” approach to which Burgess said lawmakers respond.

If it works this time around, conservative activists may prevail.

“We’re at the point where if [the summit] doesn’t work, there’s really not a lot of time to reboot before elections,” he noted.

Ambreen Ali writes for Congress.org.

Assessing the Air War

The faster pace of campaigns really is changing politics. As the New Year dawned, almost no one in either party thought the Massachusetts Senate race would be hot. It reached the boiling point at cyberspeed; an astonishing $23 million was spent on the race by the time voters went to the polls.

Scott Brown raised an astounding $13 million between January 1 and his victory on January 19. The money came in so fast he couldn’t spend it all and wound up with a $4 million surplus. While Mr. Brown did outspend Democrat Martha Coakley by $8.7 million to $5.1 million in the homestretch, the discrepancy was reduced by various Democratic groups who spent $6.1 million on ads and get-out-the-vote efforts. By contrast, seven GOP and conservative groups chipped in $2.7 million on behalf of Mr. Brown. Overall, the campaign’s final days saw spending between the two camps turn out roughly equal.

But the quality of the messages clearly mattered. Panicked liberals put out so many negative ads against Mr. Brown that several backfired. A direct mail piece from the state Democratic Party announced that “1,736 Women Were Raped in Massachusetts in 2008; Scott Brown Wants Hospitals To Turn Them All Away.” Michael Scherer of Time Magazine said the move was a “roll towards [the] gutter,” though the ad was echoed by the Coakley campaign itself, which ran an ad saying Mr. Brown would “deny rape victims care.”

There were tough Republican ads too, including one that refused to credit Ms. Coakley’s explanation that her comment in the debate that “we have to get taxes up” referred to growing revenues from an improving economy rather than higher taxes. In general, however, the anti-Coakley ads were hard-hitting but concentrated on the issues.

Surprisingly, few of the ads that sought to help Mr. Brown focused on health care, which about half of voters told pollsters was their No. 1 issue. Instead, most ads focused on overall economic themes. An exception was funded by Independent Women’s Voice, which ran a radio ad and placed thousands of live and recorded phone calls to voters in order to critique the Obama health care plan. Two Massachusetts physicians, Lorraine Schratz and Barbara Rockett, detailed specific concerns with ObamaCare in messages aimed at independent and GOP women. Mr. Brown wound up winning 47% of women voters in the state, equal to the number of women who indicated they opposed the health care bill before Congress.

– John Fund