How did Missouri get a caucus and a primary that doesn’t count?

Tommorow is the Presidential primary election in Missouri – but it doesn’t count. Instead, caucuses that start on March 17^th will select which GOP Presidential candidate Missouri backs. How did this come about? There is no short answer, and the answer will probably not satisfy anyone.

In 2010 the Republican National Committee (RNC) set new rules for the 2012 race that would punish any state, other than Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, or Nevada, to have a primary or caucus before March 6, 2012. Any state that had a contest before that date would lose half its delegates at the national convention – meaning the state’s vote only counted for half of what it would otherwise. The RNC’s goal was to combat the trend of front-loading the primaries in which states moved them earlier and earlier.

The problem was that Missouri’s Presidential primary election was set for early February, as it had been since 2002 when the date was last changed. Unless something changed, the RNC would punish Missouri by striping the state of half of its delegates.

In April 2011 the Missouri House of Representatives and Senate passed a bill that would move the date of the Presidential primary. The new date for the election would be the first Tuesday after the first Monday in March, which was the earliest date allowed by the RNC. The bill passed with broad bipartisan support: in the House by a vote of 137 to 11 and in the Senate 31 to 2.

In July, though, Governor Nixon vetoed the bill. There were two other election related changes, dealing with write-in candidates and special elections that the Governor objected to and killed the bill. Legislative leaders were upset because Gov. Nixon had not told anyone beforehand that he objected to these provisions.

When the General Assembly went into special session in early September the change of the primary was on the agenda. The special session in 2011 did not go smoothly, however. In the first three days of the special session the House passed the change by a vote of 147 to 2 and sent the bill to the Senate where it stopped. The House and the Senate were in disagreement over another bill and the Senate declined to address the election issue.

The RNC set a deadline of October 1^st for states to let the national party know when their nominating contest would be. With the primary bill stuck in the Senate the Missouri Republican Party (MRP) announced on September 30^th that it would use a caucus to pick the GOP nominee in 2012. The party set the date for the first round of the caucus on March 17^th so as to avoid punishment by the RNC.

In mid-October the state Senate debated a number of proposals. There was one that would move the primary up to January, one would push it back to March (the original plan), and another would abolish it. Since the primary now would be a beauty contest and would not be binding there was an effort to eliminate the primary in 2012 to save the state of Missouri roughly $7 million. The Senate voted to skip the primary, but the vote tied at 16 to 16, which failed to pass thus keeping the primary in addition to the caucus.

Missouri’s primary is February 6^th, but the Republican Presidential nominee will be selected at the March 17^th caucus – if you are interested in the race then go to your caucus.

Public Service

U.S. News and World Report has a new issue out that examines public service, a topic which we should focus on more often than we do. One of the essays is by former Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE), and it has some excellent points.

"Democracies and institutions of self-governance work because of responsible citizenship. Politics is the framework and elections the process that democracies use to choose leaders. The quality of leaders and effectiveness of government are directly related to informed and committed citizens willing to participate in politics. We draw from this universe those willing to offer themselves as candidates for elective office. Elections have consequences because they produce the leaders who shape the policies that govern a democracy. Politics reflects society. Every variation of public service, including elective office, should be anchored by one complete and overriding truth and objective—to make a better world. Political office is but one way to work toward this end and offer oneself in its service.

Politics is a noble endeavor—only if it is about public service. I often tell bright young people who seek my advice on running for office: Consider it only for the right reasons and understand it will be frustrating, often unfair and negative, occasionally brutal, but always exhilarating as well as enriching, rewarding, and worth doing."

Something to think about as we the voters have decisions to make a week from now at the polls.

The next two presidential elections

The presidential races have gotten longer and longer over the last few cycles and we see a number of Republicans positioning them or considering a run for the White House in 2012. While I am at silly long term Presidential race speculation, I'll throw in some comments about the 2016 race as well.

First, a few of notes about the field of potential contenders: a good chunk of the Republicans who are seriously considering a run are ones that were involved in the 2008 race, as candidates in the primary (Romney, Huckabee, Paul) or were on the ticket (Palin). Also, many of them will be out of office if they opt in for the 2012 race (Romney, Pawlenty, Gingrich, Huckabee, Palin, Hagel) - they won't have to balance the campaign schedule with governing, and the last couple of years have been full of tough choices for budgets around the country - not an easy time to be in office. Mitt Romney has been positioning himself as the candidate most adept at economic issues, but Chris Cillizza aptly points out so far there has been no "national security guy" in the Republican field. Lastly, Republicans like a front runner.

Possible 2012 Republican Contenders:

Mitt Romney (former Governor of Massachusetts) ran in 2008 and as of now is the likely front runner for the 2012 Republican nomination. He worked hard for John McCain after losing the nomination in 2008 and really impressed a lot of people. Mr. Romney has been focused on the economy for the last two years and if the economy is still issue #1 he is going to be difficult to beat for the Republican nomination in 2012.

Tim Pawlenty (Governor of Minnesota) is staffed up and ready to go. More than any of the other contenders, Romney and Pawlenty are getting their organizations in place and traveling around the country introducing themselves and lining up support. Gov. Pawlenty, though, has many more introductions to make - most Americans don't know who he is. He is not running for reelection this year, so will be a former governor come January.

Newt Gingrich (former Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives) gave some good advice to Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels: if people think that you might run for President, they will pay more attention to you and your ideas. My thinking is that Mr. Gingrich is taking his own advice. He has positioned himself as an ideas man and is making some serious money. His personal baggage is too much to be successful in a Republican primary, and my assumption is that he knows that. Side note: Esquire's recent article on Gingrich is well worth the read.

Mike Huckabee (former Governor of Arkansas) ran in 2008 and went from obscurity to well known around the country. He kept his campaign positive and showed an excellent sense of humor (his Chuck Norris ad is one I show my classes). He did very well with social conservatives and younger votes, but the question remains how wide his appeal will be. Mr. Huckabee has remained in the public eye, primarily with a show on FOX News.

Sarah Palin (former Governor of Alaska) is invariably near the top of the list when the 2012 conversation topic comes up. The reaction to the idea of Mrs. Palin as President (or as a candidate) is one that does vary significantly. Some love her, some hate her. She has great name recognition and visibility, but that can hurt as her image has been crafted already. Now she has to shape a preexisting image, a harder task in someways that a candidate introducing themselves to a new audience. Many Republicans are hesitant to support her as they feel she would make a poor candidate in a general election (and resigning as Governor still has many baffled).

Chuck Hagel (former Senator from Nebraska) would make a great president and seriously considered running in 2008. He opted against running for President after correctly assessing that he would not be able to prevail in the Republican primary (thought he would have made a great general election candidate given the issues that dominated that fall's race). He retired from the Senate and made good on his 1996 pledge to only serve two terms. He has stayed active, particularly in foreign and intelligence policy issues, but my guess is that he will not run in 2012. Were he to run, he would bring the national security and foreign policy expertise that is lacking in the rest of the field.

Rick Santorum (former Senator from Pennsylvania) lost his seat in the Senate in the 2006 election, but remains popular among the social conservatives of the party. Santorum has been popping up on lists for possible 2012 contenders, especially since he visited Iowa last year. As Politico notes: "Clearly, though, Santorum is striving to remain in the public eye. He’s a Fox News contributor, guest-hosts William Bennett’s nationally syndicated radio show every Friday morning and writes a regular column in the Philadelphia Inquirer." Bottom line for me, though, is that he got beat in his reelection campaign in a key swing state.

Haley Barbour (Governor of Mississippi) has a strong reputation as Governor (his state came away from Katrina looking much better than their neighbor to the West) and is considering a 2012 run. Gov. Barbour is a powerhouse in Republican politics, as a former chairman of the RNC and current head of the RGA. From Politico:

"Barbour’s clout is also derived from his serious interest in running for president in 2012, a point he is making clear in private conversations. His logic, one adviser told POLITICO, is simple: When he surveys what most Republicans consider to be a weak field, he sees no reason he couldn’t easily beat them. He’s a better strategist and fundraiser than any other candidate currently considering running — and just as good on television and in debates, his thinking goes."

Mitch Daniels (Governor of Indiana) is another Governor that has been encouraged to run in 2012. For a nice overview of Gov. Daniels, check out the Economist, which has a nice piece on him. The Washington Post reported that while he had previously said that he will not run for President in 2012, he has backed off that stance and is now keeping his mind open to the idea, largely because a number of people have urged him to run. At this point he would be a long shot and seems unlikely to jump in the race, but I would like to see him seriously consider it. One strike against Mr. Daniels: significant baldness. When was the last time you saw a bald President? There are not even many bald governors. When Joe Biden decided to run for President in 2008 what did he do? He got hair plugs.

John Thune (Senator from South Dakota) has supporters telling him to run in 2012 and will be giving it serious consideration. He is up for reelection this year, which would give him a good fundraising opportunity. The Fix outlines his strengths and weakness as a 2012 contender as they see it.

Ron Paul (U.S. House member from Texas) is apparently planning on running again in 2012. Rep. Paul energized people across the country in his 2008 race, but didn't end up swaying that many voters. My prediction: he won't win.

Mike Pence (U.S. House member from Indiana) is probably kicking himself for not jumping into the 2010 Indiana Senate contest (everyone seemed surprised that Sen. Evan Bayh decided not to run for reelection). He has said that he is considering a 2012 run at the White House. He is a darling of the ideological right wing of the party, but a U.S. House member has a tough road to the White House (no one in the 20th Century did it). A run may be useful to Rep. Pence to increase his name recognition and national image, but I would see it as a long shot.

Bobby Jindal (Governor of Louisiana) is mentioned as a possibility for 2012, but my bet is that he will wait for 2016 (if President Obama is reelected). He's young (only 39) and has time to wait. If he opts to run it is likely just to advance his image and make him a more serious player in the party and to build the groundwork for a later run.

And now for the waaay too far off speculation: the 2016 race. These are the people I'll be watching for the 2016 race.

The Democrats:

Hillary Clinton has said that she will not run for President again, but is going to be the first name many think of for the 2016 Democratic field.

Evan Bayh (former Indiana Governor and Senator)

Mark Warner (Senator from Virginia)

The Republicans (assuming President Obama is reelected, otherwise the incumbent will likely be a shoo in for the nomination):

Jon Huntsman (U.S. Ambassador to China, former Utah Governor)

Bobby Jindal (Governor of Louisiana)

John Thune (Senator from South Dakota)

I would love to hear from readers: what are your thoughts on the Republican 2012 field or about the potential candidates themselves.

Transparency strikes again

This is why we have ethics reports published: so people who are interested can read up for fun, and perhaps even make a difference.

Case in point: The Beacon Backroom reported on a new Missouri Ethics Commission complaint against Cynthia Davis, who is a member of the Missouri House of Representatives and is challenging incumbent GOP state Senator Scott Rupp in next Tuesday's primary election.

I am impressed with this find and the analysis of it. "Dawson said today that she wanted to emphasize that good government, not politics, was her motivation. "I have a master's degree in public affairs," Dawson said. At the moment, she's also unemployed so "I have a lot of free time right now.""

Now that is putting spare time to good use.

Corcoran is out in the 24th

The Missouri 24th Senate District is going be to be hotly contested one this election cycle. The Democratic primary is shaping up to be one of the biggest in the state and today we see an interesting development. Four term (and term limited) State Representative Mike Corcoran has dropped out of the race. This leaves former Rep. Page and County Councilwoman Fraser as the key contenders for the seat. There is another entry in the Democratic primary, but she doesn't seem to be campaigning.

Here is a response from the Page campaign on the news:

Corcoran Withdraws From Senate Race

State Representative Michael Corcoran from St. Ann, has withdrawn from the Democratic primary for the 24th District Senate seat. In a press release Corcoran cited the need to spend more time with his two sons as the reason he has decided against a run for the state senate.Corcoran served four terms as the State Representative for the 77th District, and had also been a member of the St. Ann Board of Aldermen. "I wish Mike and his family the best," Page said. "He has been a strong leader for the St. Ann community and organized labor for the past eight years." Corcoran's decision leaves Dr. Sam Page and two other candidates seeking the Democratic nomination for the 24th State Senate District.

The winner of the Democratic primary will face John Lamping, who is the only Republican running for the seat.

Top of the ticket in Illinois - The Republicans

The top of the ticket in the 2010 Illinois Elections will be the Governor and the U.S. Senate seat. There are seven Republicans running for Governor and five running for the U.S. Senate. Here are some thoughts from across Illinois on these two races (the primary is on February 2nd). Dick Simpson, a former alderman who teaches political science at the University of Illinois - Chicago, articulates the key elements of the race: "February’s election is about two things: economics and ethics. The state has a budget deficit estimated at $13 billion. It can’t pay its bills. Its bonds are just above junk status." That's what this is all about - economics and ethics.

Governor

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch:

Our choice is state Sen. Kirk Dillard, 54, a lawyer from Hinsdale. He is conservative, but not doctrinaire, and has worked effectively across the aisle on issues important to the state. Before being elected to the Senate in 1994, he was chief of staff for popular Republican Gov. Jim Edgar, who has endorsed him. He cites Mr. Edgar’s tight fiscal discipline as a model for extricating Illinois from its $12 billion budget deficit.

Dick Simpson writes in the Chicago Journal:

On the Republican side, Jim Ryan is the strongest candidate even though State Sen. Kirk Dillard would make a better governor.

The Chicago Sun-Times has endorsed Sen. Kirk Dillard:

The Chicago Sun-Times endorses Sen. Kirk Dillard for governor in the Feb. 2 Republican primary. No other candidate comes close to matching his experience in the executive and legislative branches of state government, his knowledge of the back doors of power in Springfield, and his proven ability to build cross-party coalitions without abandoning core Republican values.

U.S. Senate

The St. Louis Post-Dispatch:

Experience, intellect and service make Mark Kirk of Highland Park the clear choice. He has represented his affluent Chicago North Shore district in the U.S. House since 2000. He is a leader among House GOP moderates and is an intelligence officer in the U.S. Naval Reserve.

...

Mr. Kirk is that increasingly rare bird, an independent Republican, conservative on defense and fiscal affairs, moderate to liberal on social issues. Historically, that places him in the mainstream of the Illinois GOP and would make him a formidable candidate in November.

Dick Simpson writes in the Chicago Journal:

On the Republican side, U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk is the smartest and most polished candidate. He deserves to win that primary.

The Chicago Sun-Times has endorsed U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk:

An effective five-term congressman from the north suburbs, Kirk has pro-growth views on the economy, a personal commitment to the military and a moderate stance on social issues that could attract independent voters who favored Democrats in recent elections. Smart and detail-orientated, he can captivate an audience with an in-depth, nuanced discussion of complicated issues such as the implications of closing the Guantanamo detention facility or an assessment of the Afghan war.

Please feel free to leave a comment with your thoughts on either of these (or other) races.

"A Twinkling Civility"

Tom Roeser, Chairman of the Editorial Board of the Chicago Daily Observer, has a great piece on why he supports state Senator Kirk Dillard for the Republican nomination for Illinois Governor. To me, what was great was the approach taken - that we will not find the perfect candidate, but we should not be looking for perfection. I encourage you to read "Like Reagan, Kirk Dillard Has Only 99.44% Party Purity: Is it Enough for Illinois Republicans?"

Illinois Governor's Race - Adam Andrzejewski

This morning I had the opportunity to meet Republican Gubernatorial candidate Adam Andrzejewski and see him speak to a gathering. He is a businessman with no prior government experience, but had an interesting approach. His focus in on policy - he has identified what he feels are best practices that other states have used and wants to apply them to Illinois government. He realizes that a Republican Governor will be limited in what he can do due to a heavily Democratic legislature, so he has outlined two executive orders that he wants to implement if elected. He has a good grasp of policy and an detailed approach. In addition to running for Governor he is seeking to build up the Republican party around the state, something that Illinois Republicans clearly need. Mr. Andrzejewski's focus is on fiscal and ethics issues, as these are the central issues to the state of Illinois today.

Illinois Governor Primary

The Illinois primary election is coming up on February 2nd and there are a number of competitive races (including for Governor and U.S. Senate in both major parties). One note of interest from yesterday was the Chicago Sun Times endorsing State Sen. Kirk Dillard in the GOP primary race for Governor. In the Democratic field there are two key candidates that both currently hold statewide elected office: sitting Governor Pat Quinn and Comptroller Dan Hynes.

Robin Carnahan and ballot language

Political parties are not my normal sources of information as they tend to be a bit one sided, but this is an issue that has been bothering me for a couple of years. I have seen some of the ballot summaries that have come out of the Missouri Secretary of State's office and a few have been badly biased. Whether one agrees with those issues or not, to make the process fair the summaries must be fair. Injecting politics into what should largely be a non-political office and a non-political step in the initiative process is a major problem.

"Troubling and Unfair: Robin Carnahan's Biased Ballot Language"

The future of the Korean Peninsula

The end of World War II shaped the path for the Korean Peninsula and remains near the top of the U.S. foreign policy agenda, with the Republic of Korea (ROC) as a close ally and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) as a consistent pain in the butt. The assumption is that sooner or later the North will fall and we will see reunification as we have seen in nation-states such as Germany and Vietnam.

The Atlantic Council has a good piece, The Cost of Korean Reunification, that I want to recommend. There will be significant challenges to reunification, the largest likely being the economic costs involved in combing a highly successful economy with one that has major starvation issues.

Purity vs. Pragmatism

ABC News has a piece on a proposal for the Republican National Committee (RNC) 2010 meeting that is intriguing (but a bad idea). The debate is whether or not the RNC should be funding moderate candidates. The proposal is that any candidate that wants RNC funding must agree with a set of policy positions to be eligible (thus proving that he or she is sufficiently conservative).

After the 2006 and 2008 electoral losses the Republicans suffered the debate raged between those that thought the party had drifted too far to the right and those that thought that it was not conservative enough. The proposal for RNC funding is another manifestation of that divide. Should the party focus on the core of the conservative element of the party, or should it rather expand the coalition of the party by recruiting and assisting more moderate candidates as well?

Political parties are at the core coalitions that are formed to win elections. The Democrats were successful in 2006 and 2008 in part due to their excellent recruitment of more moderate candidates that prevailed in Republican leaning districts. I happen to agree with one of the people quoted in the article:

“I appreciate where people are coming from and the desire to make sure we are a cohesive group,” RNC member and Bush 41 adviser Ron Kaufman told ABC News when asked about his reaction to the proposal.

“However, we’ve also been the party of states’ rights. That is a binding principle. I’ve always believed that people in Massachusetts shouldn’t tell people in Indiana or Mississippi on who the candidates should be. There is nothing more fundamental than that in the party,” Kaufman added.

Political parties in the United States are broad coalitions with great regional variation. The national political parties will be more successful if they are pragmatic and support the candidates they think will be able to win them seats, not only those who are ideologically pure enough.

Icet and Schweich Battle for GOP Backing

State representative Allen Icet (R-Wildwood) and Thomas Schweich have both declared their candidacy for Missouri state auditor and will face off in the Republican primary election in August of 2010. Presumably the winner of this primary will go on to face incumbent Democrat Susan Montee. The auditor is one of only two statewide offices up for election in Missouri in 2010 (the other being a U.S. Senate seat) and Icet and Schweich are both credible candidates for the race.

2008 saw a bitter Republican primary in the race for Governor between U.S. Rep. Kenny Hulshof and state Treasurer Sarah Steelman. In that race it was the establishment candidate vs. the outsider, with Rep. Hulshof having the backing of most of the state's GOP leadership. The auditor race will not be a repeat of that, as the two candidates have both been successful so far in lining up establishment support for the nomination. To date, Icet has the endorsement of 80 state representatives and 4 state senators. Today Schweich announced that he was endorsed by Lt. Gov. Peter Kinder, the only Republican holding statewide office in Missouri at this time.

Both Icet and Schweich have resumes that give them credibility in their quest for the job of auditor. This is the first race that former ambassador and professor Schweich has run, while Icet is serving his 4th term in the Missouri House and was the budget chairman. Schweich has just entered the race, so he did not have to file an Missouri Ethics Committee report for last quarter, but it appears that he will have the funding to mount a well funded campaign. Since campaign donation limits were repealed in Missouri, the influence of a handful of donors could be a major wild card in this race.

The timing of Icet has been interesting so far. Just after Schweich announced that he would not be seeking the U.S. Senate seat up for election and word leaked that he was thinking about the auditor's race Icet jumped in. This gave Icet the ability to echo the call for Republican unity from a major GOP fundraiser and rode the news cycle on the auditor. Then on the day that Schweich announces he is running Icet announces that he has the endorsement of 80 state Representatives and 4 state Senators.

I fully agree with Steve Walsh: "No matter what ... this has the makings of a very interesting race."

Illinois Senate Race Clarified This Week

The 2010 U.S. Senate race in Illinois had a number of important developments this past week. Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan (D) announced that she would not run for the U.S. Senate, nor for Governor, but would run for reelection. Also on the Democratic side, Sen. Roland Burris, who currently holds the seat after being appointed by former IL Gov. Rod Blagojevich, announced that he will not run for the seat in 2010. Both of these are good news for IL Treasurer Alexi Giannoulias (D) who has been raising money for a run at the seat. Word is that Rep. Mark Kirk (R) will run for the seat (see CQ Politics). Rep. Kirk represents a Democratic leaning district in the Chicago area. He is viewed as a strong candidate for the seat, as he is a moderate in a Democratic leaning state. He will be viewed by some in the Republican party as the best chance at picking up the seat, while being attacked by other elements of the party for his moderate stances on a number of issues. There are other Democrats and Republicans eyeing the race as well.

Not a secret strategy, but perhaps not a bad idea

I ran across a blog post that got me thinking. "The Secret Republican Strategy for 2012?" highlights four possible GOP presidential candidates (Mike Huckabee, Tim Pawlenty, Sarah Palin, and Chuck Hagel) who are all out of office (or will be by 2012 in the case of Gov. Pawlenty). Mitt Romney could also be added to that list.

With my wet finger in the wind, I predict that the next Republican presidential candidate will be someone not then currently serving in a government position.

The secret strategy of the Republican Party is to proffer experienced candidates with no recent political history to be used against them. Hope and change will wear a new red suit in 2012.

While I do not think it is a secret strategy coordinated among possible rivals in 2012, there is something to the idea. Right now people in elected office, be it Governors or members of Congress (and state legislatures) are faced with difficult and unpopular choices, particularly when it comes to budgets. Being out of office means not having to make tough decisions on actions and votes that can be used against a candidate for office. Certainly all of these individuals are staying involved in the political world and are still relevant so a run in 2012 would be an option.

Additionally, a few possible 2012 contenders for the Republicans have likely been removed from the running recently. South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford's presidential ambitions likely died last month. Also, Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman was tapped by the Obama administration to be their ambassador to China, so he is out of the running as well (look for him in 2016).

Rep. Icet to run for state auditor

State Representative Allen Icet (R-84) has announced that he will be running for state auditor in 2010. Icet could not run for reelection due to term limited and had filed a finance committee to explore running for the 26th state Senate seat (which will be a hotly contested Republican primary). As the House Budget Chairman Icet certainly brings experience and credibility with his candidacy. The timing is certainly interesting, though. Clearly this is something that Icet has been considering for some time, but the events of last week may have dictated the timing of his annoucement. Last week Tom Schweich decided against running against Roy Blunt in the primary for the open U.S. Senate seat in Missouri and is now considering running for state auditor. By announcing now, Icet gets into the race before anyone else and can call for party unity (a theme of last week's Republican fundraiser) behind his candidacy. Also, the buzz about Schweich feeds the importance of the story and makes it a higher profile announcement.

OSTP - Civic participation

The Office of Science and Technology Policy in the Executive Office of the President (EOP) is looking for input on civic participation and how it can be strengthened.

How You Can Help

As we seek to identify immediate policy changes that will promote greater civic participation, we need to know from you:

1. What is the appropriate and most effective role for the government to play in fostering greater civic participation? Should the government develop content, fund the work of organizations that teach civic education, establish platforms to connect communities to each other and to government?
2. Do you know of best practices, whether from local, state or foreign governments, or foundations that foster and support civic participation? What are the most effective tools to get people to participate?
3. What skills and subject areas are the most important for civic literacy today? How do we promote the kind of civic education necessary to enable people to make greater use of government data, like the information available on Data.gov, or participate in online commenting processes, like this one or regulations.gov?

Take a look at the OSTP blog and weigh in on the conversation.

Harriett's List formed in Missouri

Politics Magazine reports: "Today a new organization dedicated to electing progressive Democratic women to the state legislature and state-wide office was born." Harriett's List will be active in Missouri races in 2010, a cycle when we will see a large number of open races in the state House and Senate due to term limits. The Beacon Backroom also has a piece on the new group.

California Supreme Court Ruling on Prop 8

The California Supreme Court issued its ruling on Proposition 8 (the ban on gay marriage that was approved by California voters in 2008) this week. The decision upheld the amendment to the California Constitution and ruled that all of the marriages that had occurred while gay marriage was legal in the state were valid. For an interesting analysis of the ruling, take a look at "In defense of the prop 8 ruling, but not defending prop 8."

Schweich to run for Senate in Missouri?

Word is that Thomas A. Schweich is considering a run for the open U.S. Senate seat in Missouri. If he runs, he will be challenging Roy Blunt in the Republican primary. The Missouri media blogs have been buzzing about this over the last couple of days, including the Beacon Backroom, the Political Fix, and at least four posts at KY3. A big part of the story are the two major Missouri Republicans that are encouraging Schweich to run (former Senator Danforth and Sam Fox).

Update: Schweich has decided not to run for the U.S. Senate and is backing Roy Blunt. See KY3: "Schweich Is Out" for more detail.