While Democrat Sen. Mary Landrieu already
has challenged Republican opponents to “bring
it on” and made
moves to bolster her 2014 reelection campaign, those in the GOP have
started the process of differentiating and sorting themselves out to determine
who best may bring it on to her ultimate displeasure.
As recently
noted, recently involuntarily retired after a single term former Rep. Jeff
Landry might want to make his absence in Washington, DC a short hiatus by
taking Landrieu’s spot, but that he faces a number of headwinds, chiefly an
excitable recently-concluded campaign against Rep. Charles Boustany that may have
alienated part of the party and particularly influential members, and depleted
many of his available resources. The two were thrown together in the same
district as a result of decennial reapportionment that cost Louisiana a seat in
the House of Representatives.
Part of Landry’s appeal has been his consistently conservative record,
particularly on fiscal matters, but another member of the state’s delegation
who could match him call for call on no tax hikes and restrained spending is
Rep. John Fleming. Their
lifetime American
Conservative Union voting records (Landry’s as of this writing just a year
as they have been compiled only through 2011) are almost identically perfectly
conservative. And Fleming probably could bring more resources to bear for such
an expensive campaign (Landrieu spent over $10 million in the 2007-08 period to
win reelection) having himself accumulated a half million to start and, like
Landry, a successful businessman who can self-finance to some degree a campaign
of this magnitude.
If then Fleming could be typecast as the “TEA Party favorite,” Rep. Bill Cassidy could
be roughly pegged as the “establishment favorite.” While conservative, his
lifetime ACU rating isn’t quite as much that as is Fleming’s, but this may work
to his favor among those party activists who consider electability more important
than ideology. And perhaps to blunt that, Cassidy has positioned
himself to emphasize particularly a weak spot of Landrieu’s: her support
of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare”) that remains
deeply unpopular nationwide and in Louisiana.
While both Cassidy and Fleming are medical doctors who still practice,
Cassidy may have more cachet on this issue because of his longtime employment
in Louisiana’s charity hospital system, giving him more experience on the front
lines of the coming changes in health care, whereas Fleming has been in private
practice most of his career. Cassidy also has not made Fleming’s level of
wealth, having been employed in state government without any entrepreneurial
career on the side. That Fleming has been so successful outside of his practice
gives
the political left conniption fits and it will try to use the populist
prejudice prevalent in Louisiana to paint Fleming as evil and heartless just because
he managed to create hundreds of jobs and made a little something for his
trouble. Not that Cassidy isn’t himself of substantial means (his 2011
disclosure shows him to be a millionaire, but Fleming’s
shows he makes that in a year), but some Republicans trying to choose between
the two if both run might think Cassidy’s image of working for government to
acquire modest wealth looks better to low-information, low-interest voters, who
tend to support Landrieu, than does Fleming’s entrepreneurship (even with a compelling
rags-to-riches story as has Fleming).
Cassidy also has an advantage in his geographical positioning in the
center of the state (Baton Rouge) where his district touches population center
of probably more than half the state’s population, whereas Fleming’s district
emanates from the northwest corner (Shreveport) into some of the least
populated areas (which is why
geographically it takes up much more space). This gives Cassidy a head start in
publicizing qualities for a candidacy. His committee and subcommittee assignments
also help him here in comparative perspective: serving on the House Energy and Commerce
Committee but particularly by being on its Health, Environment and the
Economy, and Commerce, Manufacturing and Trade subcommittees put him more in
the center of action than does Fleming’s placement on Armed Services and on Natural Resources (even as he is
chairman of one of the latter’s subcommittees, Fisheries, Wildlife, Oceans, and
Insular Affairs). Around $2 million in unspent campaign funds also doesn’t hurt
him.
While months ago the Senate
may have seemed somewhat appealing to Gov. Bobby
Jindal, the failure of the Republican presidential ticket to get elected last
fall reduced his need to find a landing pad for a political future after Baton
Rouge other than making a run for an open-seat presidency if he so desires.
That he has taken
on Republican Governors Association additional duties that also would
directly interfere with a 2014 Senate campaign indicates this office has
dropped off his radar screen.
So the two leading men, again roughly and imprecisely dividable into representing
more “ideological” and more “establishment” wings of the GOP, are,
respectively, Fleming and Cassidy. Between the two, perhaps even the first tentative
indications of an upcoming differentiation came when Fleming was the only
Louisiana delegation member to vote against nearly $10 billion in additional
spending relief for the after-effects of Hurricane Sandy that struck the
northeast, arguing
that the aid was worthy, but not paid for.
No comments:
Post a Comment