Federal Judiciary

The DCCC on Your TV -- By: Jim Geraghty

The first thing that jumps out at a reader examining the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee's list of reserved advertising for this fall's midterm elections is the organization's consistency with Democrats' recent record on deficit spending. The DCCC finished June with $33.78 million in cash on hand; their list of reserved advertising time amounts to a cost of $46 million.

The scale of the outlined advertising offensive is enormous: 82 television markets -- with multiple ad campaigns in some markets (meaning the DCCC intends to run ads for more than one House race within the broadcast area of Chicago, for example) -- and roughly 60 House races, in an effort to defend 54 incumbents. In just the final week of the campaign, the DCCC says it will spend $1.1 million in television advertising in Cleveland's market alone, most likely to defend Rep. Betty Sutton, who is likely to be outspent overwhelmingly by Republican Tom Ganley, and Rep. John Boccieri, who was one of the last 'yes' votes for health care and now faces a tough push from GOP challenger Jim Renacci.

#ad#Is the ad blitz intended to project confidence? Is it a sign that vulnerable House Democrats are literally all over the map, and that the only realistic strategy for containing the damage is to throw money at the problem? Or is it simply an unrealistic wish list, a fantasy that imagines a world where the committee could afford to spend $2.1 million in the Portland (Ore.) market to protect two incumbents who would ordinarily be safe, David Wu and Kurt Schrader, or to fund an open-seat race in Washington's 3rd district?

'Right now, the Democrats have one storyline: ‘We have more money,'' says Brad Todd, a veteran GOP consultant based in Tennessee. 'They don't have the grassroots energy, they don't have good polls, and they don't have momentum. This ad buy enables them to get people to write stories about their financial advantage.'

But the size and scope of the list communicate a contrary message, Todd concludes. 'With this list, they're saying a lot about their vulnerabilities with their money that they haven't said with their words.'

There aren't a lot of competitive races in the San Francisco area; it appears the DCCC plans to spend $756,000 to defend incumbent Jerry McNerney from David Harmer; McNerney won 55 percent to 45 percent in 2008. Another $336,000 is allocated for Iowa, where incumbent Democrats Leonard Boswell and Dave Loebsack weren't supposed to be in much trouble this cycle.

Ads are scheduled to begin early (September 28) in Montgomery and Dothan, Ala.; Phoenix and Tucson, Ariz.; Fargo and Bismarck, N.D.; and Erie and Wilkes-Barre, Pa. If early spending is a sign of vulnerability, this suggests that DCCC chairman Chris Van Hollen is most worried about incumbents Bobby Bright of Alabama, Harry Mitchell and Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona, Earl Pomeroy of North Dakota, and Kathy Dahlkemper and Paul Kanjorski of Pennsylvania.

Todd notes Tennessee has two open seats previously held by Democrats and a potentially vulnerable incumbent in Lincoln Davis. The DCCC is scheduling $1.5 million of ads in three markets in that state. 'Tennessee has gone pretty deep red,' Todd says. 'It's one of the few states where McCain did better than George W. Bush. If Democrats want to spend more money on races in Tennessee, they're welcome to do so.'

David Carney, a veteran New Hampshire–based political strategist who was deputy executive director at the National Republican Senatorial Committee when the GOP won the Senate in 1994, sees a bit of bluster in the DCCC list. 'I think it's clear that this is a massive morale-boosting effort. It's really just a show of force to keep the incumbent and donor morale from flaming out,' he says. 'What they spend is totally fungible, so no real money is risked; they just ‘placed' the buys, and they can change them on a moment's notice.#...# As these ‘dead candidates walking' head back to their districts, they now have a feel-good press release to wave in front of donors and activists to show they're going to fight back. It's a smart but transparent move. The bad side of this ploy is when they cancel the buy.'

#page#One GOP consultant looked over the list and chuckled that the DCCC expects to spend $3.5 million in the Chicago media market, almost $3 million in the Philadelphia market, and $2.1 million in the Portland (Ore.) market. Needless to say, these are all traditional Democratic strongholds. Of course, most of the advertising is aimed at more competitive House districts in the suburbs of those cities, but the Republican consultant notes that these are all areas where an appearance by President Obama would normally be a great, and perhaps sufficient, advantage for an endangered Democrat. 'If that's really the case, they're going to spend a fortune in places they shouldn't have to,' he says.

The list of DCCC spending also comes with a list of each ad-buy's 'gross rating points' (GRPs), which are best described as a measurement of an ad campaign's frequency and reach. Ganley says that different campaigns will have different standards, but he estimates that roughly 700 GRPs are needed for each message in a relatively quiet environment, before September. In October, he calculates, 1,000 GRPs are needed to get a message through; in the final two weeks of a campaign, anywhere from 1,200 to 1,500 GRPs can be needed.

#ad#Based on those calculations, we should expect the DCCC plan to include multiple messages -- perhaps one positive message and one negative one -- in only a few markets during the final week of the race: Montgomery, Ala.; Kansas City, Mo.; Columbus and Cleveland, Ohio; Portland, Ore.; and Wilkes-Barre, Pa. In this light, the DCCC ad campaigns scheduled for the final week in some markets -- 700 GRPs in La Crosse, Wis.; 600 GRPs in Cedar Rapids, Iowa; 250 GRPs in El Paso, Texas -- seem likely to get lost in the cacophony of ads that will deluge the airwaves during those final days.

Because the list represents a malleable plan, one Washington Republican watching the House races closely suspects that some races on it will end up with no advertising after all. 'I see this list as 90 percent meat and about 10 percent fat,' he concludes. He notes that because all of the spending is allocated for the campaign's final month, the DCCC spending plan is designed as a wall for endangered Democrats, signaling to incumbents and their like-minded allies (such as labor unions) that the cavalry will arrive in October. Candidates can deplete their campaign coffers before then, or save up to piggyback on the DCCC advertising wave.

If, as expected, October brings word of many endangered Democratic incumbents, the DCCC is likely to prioritize and focus on protecting incumbents instead of knocking off the handful of GOP House incumbents who look vulnerable this cycle. Their scheduled expenditures of $221,000 in Honolulu (aimed at Charles Djou) and $232,000 in New Orleans (presumably aimed at Joseph Cao, or perhaps at the open-seat race in the 3rd district) will probably be first on the chopping block. The $1.7 million set aside for Miami -- most likely aimed at the open-seat race in Florida's 25th district (a district currently held by the GOP) -- will also probably look like an unaffordable luxury in an expensive market as Election Day approaches.

The 2010 campaign cycle will have a lot of twists and turns before November 2, but a few factors are already clear: Democrats have to defend a stunning number of vulnerable incumbents, and there won't be sufficient resources to defend all of them the way the DCCC would prefer. As in a game of musical chairs, a mad dash will end with some folks losing their seats.

-- Jim Geraghty writes the Campaign Spot on NRO.

Full post as published by Bench Memos - National Review Online on August 04, 2010 (boomark / email).