When Dr. Sekula-Gibbs was being enticed to become the write-in replacement for Tom DeLay in this heavily-Republican district, her people spoke of RNC promises of up to $3 million in outside money to help hold the seat. It hasn't been forthcoming, leading many to wonder if Republicans are simply conceding the seat to Democratic former Rep. Nick Lampson, who they will easily beat for reelection in 2008 when a Republican will actually appear on the ballot. Cragg Hines has the story in the Houston Chronicle:
Shelley Sekula-Gibbs may have been preparing an abandonment suit against national Republicans until a few financial pops and a fund-raising visit by Vice President Dick Cheney were announced last week. But fiscal support from the GOP hierarchy for the party's candidate in the race to succeed Tom DeLay in suburban Houston's 22nd U.S. House district remains anemic.
* * * * *Most importantly, Democrats claim, the NRCC had, as the week ended, reserved no television time for any of its own ads to promote Sekula-Gibbs or, more likely, batter Democratic nominee Nick Lampson, who will actually be on the ballot.
"I don't dispute that," NRCC spokesman Carl Forti said midweek.
By contrast, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has booked an estimated $850,000 in TV time to bolster Lampson's campaign in the crucial two weeks before the Nov. 7 election.
A $99,465 NRCC check last week for some "door to door" get-out-the-vote activity indicated a slightly quickened national pulse regarding Sekula-Gibbs, but it's not the $1 million-plus in "independent" spending that could be expected for a race in which senior Republican strategists had more faith.
Read the whole story at the link above. It is possible the GOTV effort can educate enough voters to beat Lampson, but the evidence doesn't show the national party has any faith that will happen.
Lampson is essentially a spite candidate, a former House member whose district was lost to redistricting by Republicans. He got lucky when DeLay withdrew too late to be replaced. President Bush carried the district with 65% of the vote in 2004, so it should be a seat we can retake in '08.
Whoever promised the Sekula-Gibbs campaign all that support should be fired, though. That's no way to recruit candidates.
Permalink | Send To A Friend | Linking Blogs | Digg this!
Filed under:
Congressional Races, Texas
Comments (4)
Actually, they promised her... (Below threshold)1. Posted by John Hawkins | October 2, 2006 2:08 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Actually, they promised her millions IF, and they made it clear that this was very important, she was the only Republican write in candidate. She's not.
Given the amount of money Lampson has and that the Dems are spending -- along with Sekula-Gibbs unfortunate last name -- this seat would probably cost too much to keep.
Why spend 2 or 3 million dollars to hang on there when you could make a big impact in 6-10 other races?
1. Posted by John Hawkins | October 2, 2006 2:08 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 2, 2006 14:08
2. Posted by Jim Addison | October 2, 2006 2:37 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Coincidentally, I posted a similar sentiment on Alex' post above almost simultaneous with yours.
I'm not aware of any restrictions on the promise of help, but then I am relying on my recollection of what was said at the time - and it was coming from the Sekula-Gibbs camp, for whatever that is worth.
Sugarland Mayor Wallace was the other major Republican to declare for the race, and he withdrew. If there are others, they are certainly minor ones. It seems a rather shoddy excuse - or else it was a shoddy promise of help to begin with, though.
One of the reasons we have such a motley assortment of elected officials from all parties is the difficulty in recruiting good people to run for office. If we hold out carrots of inducement to run, then withdraw them on whatever pretext, it won't make future recruitment any easier.
That said, I do not disagree that the money might not be best spent holding this seat in lieu of several others. One could have just as well made that judgement BEFORE offering the incentive to Sekula-Gibb, however.
2. Posted by Jim Addison | October 2, 2006 2:37 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 2, 2006 14:37
3. Posted by Preston | October 2, 2006 3:56 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Just because Bush had 65% of the vote in 2004 doesn't mean he's polling anywhere close now. Once Lampson is in, it's his seat to lose, not his party's. Incumbency is stronger in the House than in the Senate. This notion of any Republican re-taking this seat in 2008 is bold, if not cocky. Lampson is a fine legislator, and was only beaten in 2004 because his district was gerimandered. Perhaps Republicans should try similar in order to oust him in 2008.
3. Posted by Preston | October 2, 2006 3:56 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 2, 2006 15:56
4. Posted by Rhymes With Right | October 2, 2006 4:35 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I'm one of the precinct chairs down here in CD22, and i think folks may yet be surprised come Nov 8 to find that Sekula-Gibbs is the new representative from the district -- both in special and general elections.
And as far as her not being the only GOP write-in candidate, the reality is that she is. Don Richardson cannot legitimately be considered a Republican, as he has not voted in a GOP primary in the last Decade.
Besides, he ought to be going to jail soon for soliciting a bribe.
http://rhymeswithright.mu.nu/archives/195127.php
4. Posted by Rhymes With Right | October 2, 2006 4:35 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 2, 2006 16:35