Pennsylvania was the most notable of the original thirteen states and thus had attracted a relatively diverse mix of people. A century later, Pennsylvania had become an industrial powerhouse, especially in the areas of coal and steel. Thus, the state suffered badly in the Great Depression and in many ways has fallen behind ever since. The state has suffered almost no population growth, especially in the Western part of the state, and has gone from 34 to 19 (and probably 18 for 2012) House members since 1930.
Until the Great Depression, Pennsylvania was heavily Republican (sticking with Herbert Hoover in 1932), but increasing unionization made the state more Democratic and it has been rather marginal since the 1950's. As social issues became paramount in the 1990's, the Philly suburbs became more Democratic and small town Western Pennsylvania became more Republican. In recent years the state has produced an eclectic mix of statewide officeholders: pro-choice Republicans (Tom Ridge), pro-life Democrats (Robert Casey Sr. and Jr.), hard right Republicans, Rick Santorum, Pat Toomey), Philly machine Democrats (Ed Rendell), and chameleons (Arlen Specter). While the state edges just a bit to the left in national races, Pennsylvania has yo-yoed between the parties over the past four years just like the rest of the nation.
2010 saw the reversal of Democratic gains from 2006-2008 in the House delegation. Republicans also narrowly took the Senate seat from party switcher Arlen Specter and continues the state's six decade long tradition of alternating eight years in the Governor's Mansion. Pennsylvania should remain a contested state in the 2012 Presidential race, and one that could seal a Republican victory. Democratic Senator Robert Casey Jr. will also be up for reelection, but he makes a tough target.
Republicans will control a redistricting process in which the state should lose one House seat. The 2000 plan was already heavily gerrymandered in favor of Republicans, and the Republican advantage was restored after the GOP picked up five seats in the 2010 election. From a pure numbers perspective, the easiest thing to do would be to consolidate the Philadephia districts of Robert Brady, Chaka Fattah, and Allyson Schwartz. However, doing so would leave some excess territory that would hurt the surrounding marginal Republican incumbents. The Philly suburbs will have enough people to basically keep their seats as is. Instead, look for redistricters to target third term Democratic Jason Altmire in the Republican leaning fourth district or Mark Critz in the marginal Twelfth District, who will be serving his first full term. Either district could probably be eliminated without endangering neighboring Republicans.
President – 21 Electoral Votes
Pennsylvania is perennially one of the top battlegrounds. Republicans have contested the state heavily in the past three elections. George W. Bush visited Pennsylvania more than any other state in his first term. John McCain practically lived here in 2008. The end result was to simply suggest that state specific campaigning is overrated. Republicans have consistently done about 2-3 points worse here than in the average state. As no Republican has topped 51% nationally in a Presidential race since 1988, they consistently fall just short in Pennsylvania. The Democrats absolutely have to win Pennsylvania to have any chance at the White House. It will be seriously contested under any circumstances. President Obama’s problems with blue collar white voters could really cost him here.
Pennsylvania’s primary is scheduled to occur on April 24, which is probably too late to matter. If two candidates are still in the race, it could prove decisive. One can imagine an even battle here between Mitt Romney with his base in the suburbs and Sarah Palin carrying socially conservative rural voters. TOSSUP REPUBLICAN.
Governor – Ed Rendell (D)
Rendell is done after two terms. He will be replaced by Republican Attorney General Tom Corbett, continuing the pattern since 1954 of each party alternating eight years in the Governor's Mansion. Corbett won an impressive 55%-45% victory over Dan Onoranto, but expect this to be competitive in 2012.
Senior Senator – Arlen Specter (D)
Yes Arlen, life will go on without you. He will be replacde by the man who drove him out of the Republican Party, Pat Toomey, who beat the man who defeated Specter in the Democratic primary, Joe Sestak, 51%-49%. Toomey is about as far to the right as you can get, and this is why he ran behind Corbett and barely pulled out a 51%-49% victory. This makes his position highly unstable going forward, but don't forget this state did reelect Rick Santorum. Still, Toomey will be perhaps the most obvious target for Democrats in 2016. TOSSUP DEMOCRAT.
Junior Senator – Robert Casey (D)
Casey is a pro-life social moderate but economically very liberal Democrat. This makes him a good fit for Pennsylvania. He will be tough to oust even in a Republican year. Former Senator Rick Santorum has considered running, but his 59%-41% wipeout against Casey in 2006 suggests he could not beat Casey even in a good Republican year. LEAN DEMOCRAT.
House 1 – Robert Brady (D)
Brady moonlights as Representative. His real job is being Philadelphia’s Democratic boss. He says, “95% of my day is not Congress.” Considering that his district is about 57,000 people short for 2012, perhaps he should just quit. Still, redisricters are likely to keep two Philadelphia seats so that this heavily Democratic area does not threaten suburban Republicans. SAFE DEMOCRAT.
House 2 – Chaka Fattah (D)
See above, but Fattah needs to pick up about 109,000 people. Both he and Brady might have to pick up more suburban areas. SAFE DEMOCRAT.
House 3 – Kathy Dahlkemper (D)
Had Dahlkemper kept this Erie based swing seat, she would have been a strong candidate to have her seat eliminated. Instead, she lost 56%-44% to Mike Kelly. This district will probably expand west and south to pick up territory from Jason Altmire and Glenn Thompson which will probably make this seat distinctly more Republican. LEAN REPUBLICAN.
House 4 – Jason Altmire (D)
Altmire has put up a very conservative voting record for a Democrat in his two terms in this suburban Pittsburgh seat. This saved him in the 2010 tsunami, but his winning margin was only 51%-49%. Redistricters could mess with this district (he needs another 50,000 people) to make his life miserable. More likely, this district will be carved up and Altmire can either run in a heavily Democratic district against Mike Doyle, a swing district with fellow Democrat Mark Critz on unfamiliar territory, or distinctly Republican districts against Tim Murphy or Mike Kelly. TOSSUP REPUBLICAN.
House 5 – Glenn Thompson (R)
This huge North Central Pennsylvania seat will have to pick up 50,000 people, but is surrounded by Republican territory. SAFE REPUBLICAN.
House 6 – Jim Gerlach (R)
Gerlach somehow survived 2006-2008 in this Democratic leaning Reading/Suburban Philly district. He was rewarded with a 57%-43% victory in 2010. His district has actually grown smartly and Gerlach will probably find himself relieved of some of his more Democratic territory by the Philly districts that need them. LEAN REPUBLICAN.
House 7 – Joe Sestak (D)
This Suburban Philly seat went Democratic in 2006 but in true marginal fashion, switched to the Republicans in 2010. Patrick Meehan took the open seat 55%-45%. This district should be a bit more Republican after redistricting, but should still be competitive. TOSSUP REPUBLICAN.
House 8 – Patrick Murphy (D)
Murphy lost his seat 54%-46% to Mike Fitzpatrick, the man he beat in 2006. This Bucks County seat is prime marginal territory. Though it will have to move further away from Philadelphia, the surrounding territory ensures the partisan balance here won't change much. TOSSUP REPUBLICAN.
House 9 – Bill Shuster (R)
This is the heartland of Pennsylvania Republicanism. This South Pennsylvania seat needs 40,000 people and will probably be used to eat away at Mark Critz's seat. SAFE REPUBLICAN.
House 10 – Christopher Carney (D)
This rural Northeast Pennyslvania seat is mostly Republican (54% for John McCain). Carney won it because in a Democratic year, the Republican incumbent was accused of beating up his mistress. It went back to form in 2010, voting 55%-45% for Republican Tom Marino. This seat will have to expand by 50,000 people, but it shouldn't change the mostly Republican nature of the district.
House 11 – Paul Kanjorski (D)
Kanjorski nearly lost this Scranton based Democratic leaning seat in 2008 to Lou Barletta, so in 2010 he was obviously dead meat, losing 55%-45% to Barletta. The new Representative may want some more Republican territory from Tom Marino, but due to population numbers that might not be possible.
House 12 – Mark Critz (D)
When John Murtha died in February, Republicans looked forward to taking this ancestrally Democratic but now quite marginal Southwest Pennsylvania seat, the only district in the country to switch from John Kerry to John McCain. However, Critz beat Republican Tim Burns in the May special election 53%-45% on a campaign platform that opposed much of the Obama high profile agenda. He nipped Burns 51%-49% in November.
This seat has convoluted boundaries designed to protect Murtha and would be very easy to eliminate or combine with Jason Altmire's district. Expect Critz to be among the most endangered Democrats in redistricting. TOSSUP DEMOCRAT.
House 13 – Allyson Schwartz (D)
This suburban Philly seat is mostly Democratic, and Schwartz survived the wave 56%-44%. This seat needs to pick up 40,000 people (probably more after some of it is used to shore up the Philly districts). She could easily have her district eliminated, except doing so would endanger marginal Republicans Charlie Dent, Mike Kelly, and Mike Fitzpatrick. Instead, expect her to take Democratic territory off their hands. LEAN DEMOCRAT.
House 14 – Mike Doyle (D)
This is a very safe Democratic district in the heart of Pittsburgh. It also needs about 105,000 people to meet the equal population standard. That fact will make it very easy for Republican redistricters to end Jason Altmire's career. SAFE DEMOCRAT.
House 15 – Charlie Dent (R)
This marginal Allentown based seat had liked Dent, keeping him through two Democratic years and reelecting him 54%-39% in 2010. This seat will actually need to shed 9,000 people, so Dent will probably keep a very similar district. He probably won't see himself strengthened too much because other Republicans need help more.
House 16 – Joe Pitts (R)
This mostly Republican Lancaster based seat can survive with just minor changes, although it wouldn't surprise me to see it trade some territory with the Sixth District to shore up Mike Kelly. SAFE REPUBLICAN.
House 17 – Tim Holden (D)
Holden keeps winning this Republican leaning Harrisburg/industrial Central Pennsylvania, putting up an impressive 56%-44% win in 2010 when similarly situated Democrats were dropping like flies. The seat needs to add 41,000 people and would probably be easy to eliminate. However, Holden could easily run against Mike Kelly if that happened and Republicans would not want that matchup. Altmire and Critz are easier targets, so expect Holden to survive.
House 18 – Tim Murphy (R)
The only Republican in a sea of House Democratic Murphys (who had a rough 2010), Murphy has entrenched himself in this Republican leaning suburban Pittsburgh seat. His seat needs 40,000 and will be used to knock out some combination of Jason Altmire and Mark Critz, though that shouldn't hurt Murphy. SAFE REPUBLICAN.
House 19 – Todd Platts (R)
This South Pennsylvania seat will be renumbered, but is actually 10,000 people over the equal population standard and thus should remain in place for Platts. SEAT ELIMINATED
Monday, November 29, 2010
State of the Day - Pennsylvania
Labels:
Election Projection,
Pennsylvania,
State Of The Day
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

2 comments:
A survey of 800 Pennsylvania voters conducted on December 16-17, 2008 showed 78% overall support for a national popular vote for President.
Support was 87% among Democrats, 68% among Republicans, and 76% among independents.
By age, support was 77% among 18-29 year olds, 73% among 30-45 year olds, 81% among 46-65 year olds, and 78% for those older than 65.
By gender, support was 85% among women and 71% among men.
http://nationalpopularvote.com/pages/polls.php#PA_2008DEC
By 2012, The National Popular Vote bill could guarantee the Presidency to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).
Every vote, everywhere, would be politically relevant and equal in presidential elections. Elections wouldn’t be about winning states. Every vote, everywhere would be counted for and directly assist the candidate for whom it was cast. Candidates would need to care about voters across the nation, not just undecided voters in a handful of swing states.
Now 2/3rds of the states and voters are ignored — 19 of the 22 smallest and medium-small states, and big states like California, Georgia, New York, and Texas. The current winner-take-all laws (i.e., awarding all of a state’s electoral votes to the candidate who receives the most popular votes in each state) used by 48 of the 50 states, and not mentioned, much less endorsed, in the Constitution, ensure that the candidates do not reach out to all of the states and their voters. Candidates have no reason to poll, visit, advertise, organize, campaign, or care about the voter concerns in the dozens of states where they are safely ahead or hopelessly behind. Voter turnout in the “battleground” states has been 67%, while turnout in the “spectator” states was 61%. Policies important to the citizens of ‘flyover’ states are not as highly prioritized as policies important to ‘battleground’ states when it comes to governing.
The bill would take effect only when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of the electoral votes–that is, enough electoral votes to elect a President (270 of 538). When the bill comes into effect, all the electoral votes from those states would be awarded to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and DC).
The bill uses the power given to each state by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution to change how they award their electoral votes for president. Historically, virtually all of the major changes in the method of electing the President, including ending the requirement that only men who owned substantial property could vote and 48 current state-by-state winner-take-all laws, have come about by state legislative action.
In Gallup polls since 1944, only about 20% of the public has supported the current system of awarding all of a state’s electoral votes to the presidential candidate who receives the most votes in each separate state (with about 70% opposed and about 10% undecided). Support for a national popular vote is strong in virtually every state, partisan, and demographic group surveyed in recent polls in closely divided battleground states: CO– 68%, IA –75%, MI– 73%, MO– 70%, NH– 69%, NV– 72%, NM– 76%, NC– 74%, OH– 70%, PA — 78%, VA — 74%, and WI — 71%; in smaller states (3 to 5 electoral votes): AK – 70%, DC – 76%, DE –75%, ME — 77%, NE — 74%, NH –69%, NV — 72%, NM — 76%, RI — 74%, and VT — 75%; in Southern and border states: AR –80%, KY — 80%, MS –77%, MO — 70%, NC — 74%, and VA — 74%; and in other states polled: CA — 70%, CT — 74% , MA — 73%, MN – 75%, NY — 79%, WA — 77%, and WV- 81%.
The National Popular Vote bill has passed 31 state legislative chambers, in 21 small, medium-small, medium, and large states, including one house in AR (6), CT (7), DE (3), DC (3), ME (4), MI (17), NV (5), NM (5), NY (31), NC (15), and OR (7), and both houses in CA (55), CO (9), HI (4), IL (21), NJ (15), MD (10), MA(12), RI (4), VT (3), and WA (11). The bill has been enacted by DC, Hawaii, Illinois, New Jersey, Maryland, Massachusetts, and Washington. These seven states possess 76 electoral votes — 28% of the 270 necessary to bring the law into effect.
See http://www.NationalPopularVote.com
Post a Comment