NLS EXCLUSIVE
Numerous Republican sources are telling me that in looking ahead towards the 2007 elections they are very concerned about the Democrats taking a majority in the State Senate.
Currently, the GOP controls 24 of 40 seats. In a 20-20 scenario, the Lt. Governor breaks the tie. Bill Bolling's 1% victory means Democrats must gain 5 seats to retake the majority.
The reason Republicans are so worried is they control four seats in Northern Virginia. These seats all saw dramatic shifts to the Democrats this year, and no one knows for sure if this is a trend, or a one time blip.
We put this quick guide together on the 4 Northern Virginia GOP Senate seats so you can understand why Republicans are so worried. We used the Byrne-Bolling results as they were the median in Northern Virginia this year (Tim Kaine ran ahead of Leslie, Creigh Deeds ran behind her).
34th Senate District- Jeanne Marie Devolities-Davis (38 Precincts)
38 Precincts to Byrne
0 Precincts to Bolling
37th Senate District- Ken Cuccinelli (38 Precincts)
29 Precincts to Byrne
8 Precincts to Bolling
1 Precinct Tied
39th Senate District- Jay O'Brien (36 Precincts)
29 Precincts to Byrne
7 Precincts to Bolling
33rd Senate District- Bill Mims (46 Precincts)
35 Precincts to Byrne
11 Precincts to Bolling
A special election is possible in the Mims district next month, should Bob McDonnell be elected Attorney General in the recount, as Mims is rumored to be appointed Assistant-AG.
The road for Democrats won't be easy, they still need to hold seats like Chuck Colgan's, and find one more district downstate to win. But with these numbers in Northern Virginia, its easy to see why Republicans are very uncomfortable.
There is certainly reason for concern, but I personally do not believe NOVA has turned decidedly democratic like this past election would suggest. I think alot of things came to pass that made everything break for the dems.
I dont think the GOP should be in panic mode yet. If we lose those senate seats though, we may have reason to feel that way.
Posted by: GOPHokie | November 27, 2005 at 03:04 PM
Devolites Davis and Cuccinelli are toast. I hope the later is reading this---remember he was talking with such bravado about how Caputo would lose and that Republican elected officials wouldn't cross over against Craddock. He was as wrong about that as he has been wrong-headed in his bigoted voting record.
Mims and O'Brien's seats may be a little harder to take.
I think a Bruce Roemmelt candidacy, should Colgan retire, could give the Democrats a great chance of holding that seat too.
Posted by: ZB | November 27, 2005 at 03:35 PM
CHAP! would be a sure winner against Devolites-Davis.
Posted by: Ray | November 27, 2005 at 04:18 PM
Heh, these Dems sound like the Reps who said we could beat Ward Armstrong, Jackie Stump, Butch Davies, Earl Dickenson Roscoe Reynolds, etc cuz George Allen ran so good there. Folks, people vote the person, not the party.
Posted by: | November 27, 2005 at 04:22 PM
It seems as though the four seats is a lot for the Democrats to bank on.Though it seems Dems can cound on two seats, they'll need to pick up three downstate to seal the deal. The question is, what downstate seats are vulnerable? On the same token, are there any vulnerable Dem seats?
Posted by: Liberal_Pi | November 27, 2005 at 04:23 PM
Even before the election, I told friends that if Greg Werkheiser lost to Dave Albo but came close (which of course is what happened), he should, if he was going to run for anything in 2007, aim for the State Senate rather than butt heads with Albo again. This confirms my opinion.
Posted by: Steven J Berke | November 27, 2005 at 05:01 PM
The Dems won't pick up 5 seats no matter what. Let's see who they recruit before we start changing the official stationairy.
Posted by: Not Corey Stewart | November 27, 2005 at 06:07 PM
Devolities-Davis may be in trouble though, as she and Tom don't support real conservatives who won't agree to be part of his corporate machine.
Posted by: Not Corey Stewart | November 27, 2005 at 06:09 PM
I disagree on Devolites-Davis as she will be difficult to beat with Davis behind her. I do not like Davis, but despite what Not Corey says, he supports the Republicans we put forward (including Cuccinelli).
I think O'brien might have more trouble than Cuccinelli. His district crosses much more into blue territory. I hope Obrien does win though.
Cuccinelli is a much more capable campaigner and is good on the stump. Despite ZB's misinformation. He does not have a bigoted voting record, and is only "wrong-headed" if you are a card-carrying liberal like ZB. In the end, the Dems will have to do alot better than Kathy Smith or Stan Barry if they want to unseat Cuccinelli.
The special election could be interesting if Mims moves on. That could be a challenge.
Bottom line, there's alot that goes on between now and NOV 2007, including a Congressional election. Who knows, maybe Tim Kaine will leave the example Mark Warner provided and actually try to do something other than just raise taxes. This could put the Dems back on the defensive. None of these seats are shoe-ins for the Dems. If the Incumbants are not overconfident and run hard races, it will take alot of work for a Dem to useat them.
Oh and one more thing. It will be important for the Republicans to unite behind their incumbants. If they have serious in-party challenges in 2007, this hurts any of these candidates and helps the Dems, no matter what the outcomes of the primaries.
Posted by: Rtwng Extrmst | November 27, 2005 at 06:43 PM
"Oh and one more thing. It will be important for the Republicans to unite behind their incumbants. If they have serious in-party challenges in 2007, this hurts any of these candidates and helps the Dems, no matter what the outcomes of the primaries."
Like the 67th this year? Wow, at least one Republican learned the lesson!
Posted by: The Ghost of Tom Joad | November 27, 2005 at 06:51 PM
Rtwng---I do not carry a card that calls me a liberal. Why is it that just because I think someone sponsoring anti-gay legislation and opposing allowing companies to voluntarily offer health insurance benefits because it might provide that benefit to same-sex couples... and someone who is in the small minority of state legislators who won't even put in writing that he doesn't discriminate PERSONALLY on the basis of sexual orientation that that makes me a liberal?
If believing that companies should be able to offer health insurance to whoever the want even if they are gay or lesbian is "liberal" that makes the following people liberals:
Senators Bell, Blevins, Chichester, Colgan, Devolites Davis, Hawkins, Houck, Norment, Puckett, Quayle, Reynolds, Stolle, and Watkins
Delegates Albo, Bell, Callahan, Hamilton, Hargrove, Joannou, Johnson, Louderback, Marrs, Morgan, O'Bannon, Orrock, Parrish, Petersen, Purkey, Rust, Saxman, Suit, Tata, Wardrup
If being willing to put in writing that you don't discriminate makes you a liberal, add John Warner, George Allen, Jerry Kilgore, and Thelma Drake to the list.
I believe Ken Cuccinelli's record is bigoted. I believe that a lot of non-liberals would agree with me.
But at least you're honest about being a right-wing extremist.
Posted by: ZB | November 27, 2005 at 11:01 PM
Actually, Delegate Albo co-sponsored HB751.
Cuccinelli would be smarter to NOT RUN in '07...save himself the trouble.
Posted by: | November 28, 2005 at 11:51 AM
Greg Galligan is running against O'Brien again.
Posted by: | November 28, 2005 at 11:51 AM
Captain Crunch is running?
Posted by: | November 28, 2005 at 11:56 AM
Actually you are in error. In a 20-20 situation a lt. gov. tiebreak does not equal control. If you remember ten years (Don Beyer was lt. gov) ago that scenario happened a power sharing agreement was put into place. With Bolling as lt. gov the republicans would probably control the majority of committees in a 20-20 situation but not all
Posted by: SE VA MWC Alum | November 28, 2005 at 12:25 PM
VAMWC, no they decided then the Lt. Gov could break the tie. Virgil Goode then announced he would vote with the Republicans if they did tried to use the LG, and forced the power sharing.
God Bless Virgil.
Posted by: | November 28, 2005 at 01:11 PM
Greg Galligan got swamped by O'Brien in 2003, 58%-42%. He and his campaign did not generate much respect from the people I knew in local Democratic circles. Greg Werkheiser would be a much better candidate; if he decides not to run, Democrats could still do better than Galligan.
Posted by: Steven J. Berke | November 28, 2005 at 02:12 PM
I think the precedent would carry some weight. As far as Virgil I agree that he is an excellent public servant.
Posted by: SE VA MWC Alum | November 28, 2005 at 05:39 PM
Tom,
I am not against party challenges to candidates who have gone against the promises that got them elected (like the 67th). ZTo m knowledge, none of these candidates mentioned above did so. Therefore any party challenge would simply be a waste of time, energy, and money that would better be used against the opposition.
Posted by: Rtwng Extrmst | November 28, 2005 at 08:21 PM
ZB,
I fail to see how it is bigoted to oppose the allowance of employees to designate health benefits to individuals without a legal connection to them no matter what sex they are. Marital connection or legal dependents are obviously fair for this provision. However, to call out that same sex or opposite sex partners only should be able to be considered in addition to these is unfair. I would have no problem with companies being allowed to provide health benefits to anyone they want. I suspect Senator Cuccinelli woud agree. However to arbitrarily limit that power to only a single same or opposite sex "partner" is simply unfair. What about someone who wants to live with their best friend in a totally platonic way, or say someone who has a long-term girlfriend as well as a wife, or wants to designate a sister or brother? It seems these kinds of relationships have at least as much significance legally or morally and to limit the law in the way you mention is just stupid. Taking this stance is not bigoted at all.
Posted by: Rtwng Extrmst | November 28, 2005 at 08:32 PM
Righty--you're missing the point. SB 1338 -- the Dillard/Howell health care bill did EXACTLY what you proposed. It said that companies can offer health insurance benefits to anyone MUTUALLY agreed upon by the employer and employee. That allowed domestic partership benefits. It allowed employers to offer health insurance to their best friend, sister, brother, etc. Cuccinellli opposed it anyway. The reason--he's anti-gay. That is bigoted. Given your reasonable view, you would probably have been one of the many reasonable Republicans who voted for SB 1338. The soon-to-be-former Senator from Fairfax was not.
Posted by: ZB | November 28, 2005 at 11:05 PM
Righty--you're missing the point. SB 1338 -- the Dillard/Howell health care bill did EXACTLY what you proposed. It said that companies can offer health insurance benefits to anyone MUTUALLY agreed upon by the employer and employee. That allowed domestic partership benefits. It allowed employers to offer health insurance to their best friend, sister, brother, etc. Cuccinellli opposed it anyway. The reason--he's anti-gay. That is bigoted. Given your reasonable view, you would probably have been one of the many reasonable Republicans who voted for SB 1338. The soon-to-be-former Senator from Fairfax was not.
Posted by: ZB | November 28, 2005 at 11:08 PM
ZB,
While I will have to admit I have not read the details of the bill, I am sure bigotry had nothing to do with Cuccinelli's stance. I know the man personally and I know him to not have a bigoted bone in his body. Now, I am willing to bet there is more to this than you are bringing up.
Posted by: Rtwng Extrmst | November 29, 2005 at 12:12 AM
NLS,
I'm a little concerned about your methodology. I understand that Byrne is the median Democratic performer in the statewide 2005 races; however, I'm not sure that that necessarily makes her the best proxy for Democratic performance in Senate races. Her NoVa ties probably overstate baseline Democratic performance. Also, the issues at the top of the ticket were most likely driving much of the train (differences in Byrne v. Kaine notwithstanding), especially on issues such as managed growth. Much of that will be neutralized in a state senate race. I think we will see a fairly large "McQuigg effect" in 2007. Local incumbent GOPers will significantly outperform Bolling. That being said, Devolites-Davis could still be in trouble, especially if a strong Democratic wave in 2006 for someone like Webb has the ancillary effect of assisting in a knock-off of Tom Davis, neutering that powerful GOP NoVa money machine. I don't know enough about the other races to make informed predictions.
Posted by: J. Sarge | November 29, 2005 at 01:31 AM
I wonder how well the Dems will do in Northern Virginia if they keep raising property taxes 11% per year? When do you think voters reach the breaking point?
Posted by: Ron | November 29, 2005 at 04:04 PM
I wonder how well the GOP will do in Northern Virginia if they keep ignoring education and transportation and focusing only on what minority group they can demonize and exclude this week. When do YOU think voters reach the breaking point?
Oh wait... they already have. See Jerry Kilgore, Mychele Brickner, Rita Thompson, Chris Craddock, Michael Menuier, Michael Golden, and Dick Black.
Posted by: ZB | November 29, 2005 at 10:06 PM
The real estate market is cooling off, which should cause property assessments to rise at a slower rate
in the future. this issue will become much less important
Posted by: SE VA MWC Alum | November 29, 2005 at 10:16 PM
SE VA MWC Alum,
I said taxes, not assessments.
ZB,
As a member of a "minority group" myself, I can assure you that the Republicans have not excluded any. When do you think voters will see through Democratic whining since they don't have any issues?
Posted by: Ron | November 30, 2005 at 01:00 PM
Ron if things in NOVA are anything like anywhere else it is rising assessments that are driving the increases. Down here city councils are actually cutting the tax rates, but taxes are still rising because the assessments are increasng so much more. Much of that money is going to overdue projects and I dont forsee tax rate increases if assessment increases slow to 2-4% annually-which is a very reasonable expectation
Posted by: SE VA MWC Alum | November 30, 2005 at 04:43 PM
I understand Ron, that you are in the minority of people who actually thought Jerry Kilgore would be a better Governor than Tim Kaine. I have no idea what other minority you are, but I'm glad you haven't felt excluded.
That said, I'm guessing you're not:
1) Gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgendered (the VA GOP has not been so forceful for inclusion there)
2) A day laborer (legally or illegally in the united states)
3) A non-Christian
4) A person with a disability
5) Desperately poor
If I'm wrong, I hope you'll tell me so.
Posted by: ZB | November 30, 2005 at 05:45 PM
Senator Cuccinelli has had numerous volunteers going door to door all Summer. Their response from their constituents were very receptive too! Cuccinelli has a fundraising advantage and keep in mind that Byrne is from the area so she had a lot of friends in this region.
Posted by: StaunchfromDC | August 27, 2006 at 09:48 PM
ur gay
Posted by: kyle | October 13, 2007 at 08:24 PM