TARGETED REPUBLICANS

Robert Novak's Syndicated Column ^ | 1/3/2004 | Robert Novak

[UCAL]

TARGETED REPUBLICANS

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), in its uphill climb to regain control of the House, has targeted four freshman Republicans: Reps. Max Burns of Georgia, Bob Beauprez of Colorado, Mike Rogers of Alabama and Rick Renzi of Arizona.

Beauprez, Rogers and Renzi all won narrowly in 2002, with Beauprez squeaking in by only 121 votes in his suburban Denver district. A Colorado Republican redistricting effort to strengthen Beauprez's district was thrown out in court. He now faces a tougher Democrat than he defeated in 2002: Columbine prosecutor Dave Thomas.

Burns won by 55 percent in the Augusta, Ga., district, but he was opposed by a convicted criminal. "He can't win in that district unless he's running against a crook," claims a Democratic operative. Burns' 2004 opponent will be Athens-Clarke County Commissioner John Barrow.

[UCAL]

Does anyone know how these guys should do?

[Support Free Republic]

Rank	Location	Receipts	Donors/Avg		Freepers/Avg		Monthlies
21	Washington	135.00	8	16.88	461	0.29	280.00	17

Thanks for donating to Free Republic!

Move your locale up the leaderboard!

[Clintonfatigued]

Rick Renzi is in the most trouble. He narrowly won a mulit-candidate primary through heavy spending, then nearly lost the general election to a 'Rat businessman with serious ethical lapses. His likely opponent is Cococino County Supervisor Paul Babbit. Bob Beaupeaz faces the Jefferson County District Attorney, hut he's made no serious mistakes. Max Burns is helped by Bush's local popularity and record of constituant service, but faces a well-funded opponent in a district that went for Al Gore. As for Mike Rogers of Alabama, he's well-funded and the 'Rats are so far unable to settle on an opponent.

[RabidRepublican2003]

Max Burns may have a hard time, his district was designed for a Dem and somehow he managed to win.

[UCAL]

Thanks for the information. I keep hearing that my own Congressman, Rob Simmons CT-2, is targeted. If he's on their target list then they must really be scraping. CT-2 has a plurality of D registration but Simmons bested a well financed candidate last time around. In fact, as Gore was stomping all over Bush in the district in 2000, Simmons knocked off a 20+ year incumbent.

I guess that even if the democrats were to knock off these four incumbents, they'd still be quite a few seats short of a majority. That's assuming they beat all four and doesn't even figure in the probably Texas gains.

[Clintonfatigued]

Bob Simmons is a target, but not a top target. Washington 'Rats are still mad at him for ousting Sam Gejdeson in 2000.

[The Old Hoosier]

Simmons is plenty safe. I think Burns and Beauprez are very vulnerable, but Renzi is likely to win.

[jagrmeister]

The key is to nationalize these elections. Many of them are in conservative or battleground states, where Bush is likely to trounce Howard Dean. Voters can either side with leftwing extremism or support a representative that can work with the President to successfully combat terrorism and create jobs.

[Impy]

IMO the order from most to least vulnerable

Burns
Beauprez (F**king court)
Renzi
Rogers

But all 4 could easily win and the rats will needing much more than 4 seats anyway.

[AuH2ORepublican]

I think Burns is most likely toast now that he's not facing a felon. The district voted 55% for Gore in 2000 (Dean won't do as well, but he could well carry the district), and we're talking about Georgia here, not Connecticut. I hope I'm wrong, but even with a liberal running against him (as I assume the Athens-Clarke County Commissioner must be, since Athens is home to UGA's largest campus and is the most liberal white-majority city in Georgia) I don't think Burns can pull off another miracle.

Renzi sits in a classic swing district, but one that is probably trending Republican as the suburban areas continue to grow and outvote the Indian reservations by larger margins. The RATs seem poised to have another divisive primary, and Bush should have heavy coattails this time around, so I would give the edge to Renzi.

Beauprez should have an easier time than Renzi, although the district is certainly very competitive. I think the CD is becoming more Republican as the white-collar suburbs grow, and Bush's coattails will help as well.

Rogers can be beat if the RATs run a popular moderate-to-conservative white Democrat who can somehow motivate blacks to come out in record numbers, but they were unable to do so in 2002, when Bush wasn't on the ballot and when then-Governor Siegelman was running almost 10% ahead of Al Gore, so I think Rogers will hold on.

But even if the RATs manage to win all 4 seats, their 7-seat loss in Texas will make it largely academic.

[Clintonfatigued]

While I enjoy reading your analysis, I think you may be surprised by Max Burns and Rick Renzi. Max Burns represents an agricultural district where Saxby Chambliss and Sonny Perdue made strong (though not necessarily winning) showings, and Burns is working hard on constituant service and keeping a high local profile. By contrast, Rick Renzi's problems are from his personal image. He's seen as a rich carpetbagger who has no interest in the district outside of his own ambitions, and he won the 2002 general election only because his 'Rat opponent had serious ethical problems. Even then, he barely won. His opponent this year will be much stronger.

[Kuksool]

The GA-12 is 40% African-American. I believe Barnes and Cleland carried the GA-12 in 2002. Thus, the district has a serious RAT base. Burns's reelection bib is going to be a long shot. However, Max Burns could be aided by having Bush and Herman Cain on ballot. If Herman Cain is the GOP Senate nominee, he just might convince enough young blacks to give the GOP another look.

[AuH2ORepublican]

I hope you two are correct about Burns' chances, and especially about Herman Cain receiving the Senate nomination and taking, say, 25% of the black vote. If Burns can get even 20% of the black vote, he should be able to pull off another upset.

As for Renzi, Clintonfatigued is correct he didn't run the best campaign in 2002 and has not been the most effective Congressman, and that the RATs are likely to nominate a better candidate than Cordova. But while perhaps Duval or Udall would have beaten Renzi in 2002, Renzi could have an easier time against either one of them in 2004 because (i) he's the incumbent, (ii) Bush's coattails and (iii) the suburban Republican areas are growing a lot faster than the Indian Reservation Democrat areas.