From 7:00pm to 9:00pm, I'm going to be away from a computer-- and, in fact, away from any televisions, radios, or other devices which report election results. During arguably the most exciting portion of the night, when Virginia may be called for Obama, or when the returns start coming in for the Georgia Senate race, or when our own district begins reporting, I won't be able to be a part of it.

For a political junkie like me, that's like missing the World Series, the Rose Bowl (Go 'Cats! I believe in you!), and the World Cup all at once, which, by the way, are also on Christmas. Tomorrow could be a really amazing day, and I’m disappointed that I’ll be missing a big part of it.

But when I do get to a computer, I’ll be looking for a few things. I don't claim to have a secret formula or know which tiny town will be the bellwether, and I'm definitely not a Grebner-like expert. But I can tell you what I think a Schauer victory might look like, and where I’ll be looking for it.

Turnout in Calhoun, Eaton, and Jackson Counties

With 98 percent of Michigan's voting population registered, there are a lot of people who could show up to vote. That’s got to worry Tim Walberg, whose victory in the 2006 GOP primary was thanks to what former Congressman Joe Schwarz called a "motivated minority" of 7.8 percent in a low-turnout primary. (Schwarz also called them "quasi-theocrats... infiltrating the party power structure"). Granted, a general election is very different from a primary, but a Walberg victory will depend on certain people not showing up, namely in Calhoun County, where Mark Schauer could run up the margin.

But Walberg has someone working against him: Barack Obama. The Obama campaign has done a phenomenal job of registering new voters who are trending Democratic. But they didn't ask prospective voters for a partisan affiliation before they registered them, nor should they have. In a Republican-leaning district, is it possible that the Obama campaign might have just registered a bunch of new Republicans?

Maybe, but judging from where the new voters are coming from, probably not. With help from the Detroit Free Press (who got the data from the Michigan Secretary of State), here's a fun table:

County Reg. Voters New Voters % Change (Jan. - Oct.)
Branch 31,805 683 +2%
Calhoun* 103,707 3,950 +4%
Eaton 80,023 2,781 +4%
Hillsdale 33,327 724 +2%
Jackson 115,357 4,672 +4%
Lenawee 71,552 2,170 +3%
Washtenaw* 273,955 24,962 +10%

Note that both Calhoun and Washtenaw Counties have portions not in the 7th District. This is especially important in Washtenaw County, where Ann Arbor (and the University of Michigan) probably accounts for most of the voters and most of the growth. However, Battle Creek, which is in the district, is the major population center for Calhoun County, and is probably responsible for most of that growth. So for our simplified purposes here, let's ignore Washtenaw County but keep Calhoun County.

As you can see, the most new voters were added in Calhoun, Eaton, and Jackson Counties (both in absolute number of voters and in proportion to their populations). Calhoun County is generally considered safe territory for Mark Schauer, who has represented the voters there in the state House and Senate since 1996 and is generally very popular. Jackson and Eaton Counties, meanwhile, are the major "battlegrounds." Not only are they vote-rich, but they were divided pretty evenly in the 2006 election (Eaton: Renier 50 Walberg 48; Jackson: Walberg 51 Renier 46). Although Schauer currently represents much of Jackson County in the state Senate, I’m expecting it to be a major battleground again. Neglected in the voter registration drives were the Walberg strongholds of Branch and Hillsdale Counties, and to a lesser degree, Lenawee County (more on it in a minute).

I don't have solid data behind me, but I'm going to guess that if they turn out to vote, the new voters in Calhoun, Eaton, and Jackson Counties will break Democratic. If they were registered by the Obama folks, they were probably targeted as students or underrepresented populations, which is probably good news for Mark Schauer. At least, that’s what I'm hoping.

In 2006, Calhoun County had 47.5 percent turnout, Eaton County had 59.9 percent turnout, and Jackson County had 51.8 percent turnout (data here and here). If turnout is higher than that in those three counties (and especially Calhoun County), new voters and Schauer loyalists could run up enough of a margin to offset losses in the southern part of the district. If the turnout is really big in Calhoun County, that might be the whole ball game.

Is that a possibility? Could central-west Michigan see a massive surge in turnout? I don’t know, but it sounds like Kalamazoo County (one west from Calhoun County) is getting ready for one:

KALAMAZOO -- Bracing for a very long and very busy Tuesday, area election officials say they're "as ready as we'll ever be" for the 2008 presidential election.

"We're in good shape," Kalamazoo County Clerk Tim Snow said. "We've been preparing for this all year. We knew this was going to be big."

A surge in voter registrations and predictions of a higher rate of participation means the county could have as many as 144,000 voters this year, compared to the 120,000 who cast ballots four years ago.

The city of Kalamazoo, in particular, has taken steps to avoid long lines Tuesday, putting in a minimum of 14 voting stations at each precinct and substantially increasing the staffing.

[...]

On Tuesday, polls will be open from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. People who are in line at 8 p.m. will be allowed to vote. The forecast calls for sunny skies and a high near 70 degrees.

Lenawee County

This is where Tim Walberg should win. He represented Lenawee County for 16 years in the state House of Representatives, and the mostly rural county is famous (or infamous) for its conservative politics and sometimes frightening tendencies. (Anyone else remember "Radio Free Lenawee"?) This is where I'm from, and I can say that it is a conservative place.

At the same time, though, people don't really like Tim Walberg all that much. Oh, sure, some do. Whenever I was canvassing, I was bound to run into someone who would say, "I plan to vote for Tim, I’ve known him for years" or something like that. But I'd also meet someone who'd say, "Walberg? I can’t believe we keep electing that guy!" The solidly-Republican state House seat Walberg vacated has been in Democratic hands (albeit moderate ones) for ten years. With state Representative Dudley Spade basically guaranteed reelection, it'll stay that way for at least two more years.

Meanwhile, the county is changing. Before the economy got really bad, a lot of people were moving out to Clinton or Tecumseh from Ann Arbor or metro Detroit for the cheaper properties, willing to put up with the couple-hour commute. They don’t have a relationship with Tim Walberg, and some of them are even (gasp) Democrats.

And the Schauer campaign has taken the county seriously, opening an office in downtown Adrian and hiring a full-time field organizer to staff it and coordinate with the Obama and Spade campaigns. Whenever he's in the county, Mark Schauer is certain to mention his great relationship with Doug and Dudley Spade, both of whom carry a lot of weight. (Side note: Their secret to success? They're actually really good representatives. If you go to Dudley Spade with a problem, he'll do everything he can to solve it.) Throw in the Obama organizers, and you've got a real chance for 2008 to be a year of Democratic revival in Lenawee County.

Will Mark Schauer win it? ... No. It just won't happen. But he can keep it close. Governor Jennifer Granholm managed to take 47 percent of the vote in 2006, and if Schauer can get a similar share of the vote and hold Walberg to 51 or 52 percent, it could mean a lot. If Schauer opens up a big lead in Calhoun County and Washtenaw County, then there just aren’t enough voters in Branch and Hillsdale Counties to make up for it. Walberg needs to win Lenawee County convincingly. If Lenawee County is as tight as the other "battlegrounds," it's going to be a rough night for Tim Walberg.

And what if Mark Schauer wins Lenawee County? Then short of something really unexpected happening, Schauer will win the district. But like I said, Schauer won't win Lenawee County. I'm not going to let my hopes get that high.

Obama

Barack Obama is going to win the state of Michigan. The only question left is "How big?" Since John McCain pulled out of Michigan, it's started to look pretty big. Here's the Pollster.com chart for Michigan:



That's quite a sight, isn't it? The final Pollster average puts it at Obama +16, which would be a bigger margin than Bill Clinton’s +13 win in 1996. That year, with the help of Ross Perot, Bill Clinton carried four of the counties that currently make up the 7th District: Calhoun, Washtenaw, Lenawee, and Branch. Calhoun and Washtenaw are to be expected, but Lenawee and Branch surprised me when I looked back at them. After all, these are supposed to be the conservative parts of the district.

Supposing Obama has similar success, picking up Calhoun, western Washtenaw, and at least one other county, is there any way Mark Schauer can lose? I'm not sure what the Obama-Walberg voter looks like, and I'd be shocked to see Obama carrying Jackson County by a wide margin but Schauer losing it. Maybe it's possible, but Mark Schauer has done a good job presenting himself as a moderate and a hard-working, dependable public servant. If Obama wins big, I can't imagine any reason for the Obama voter to choose "more of the same" and Tim Walberg.

*****

Upon re-reading all of that, I'm worried that I'm being too optimistic and tempting fate for another disappointing election night. It's possible. Even so, and despite not having any idea of what I'm doing, I think that most of my reasoning has some foundation to it. I think one of the three factors above (if not all of them) could contribute to a Schauer victory.

That's what I'll be looking for, sometime around 9:15pm Eastern Time. It's possible that there will be a clear leader by the time I arrive on the scene. We'll see soon enough if any of this is right.

Labels: 2008 Election, 2008 Speculation, Barack Obama, Dudley Spade, John McCain, Mark Schauer, Tim Walberg

Ouch. It's got to hurt when Fox News, always willing to put a more optimistic spin on things for Republicans, says Tim Walberg will lose:

MI 7: Rep. Tim Walberg (R) is one of the most-endangered Republicans this cycle in a contest against Mark Schauer. Expect a Democratic win. Especially after McCain pulled out of Michigan.

This won't mean a thing on Election Day, however. You've still got to get out there and help get out the vote for Mark Schauer.

Labels: 2008 Election, 2008 Speculation, Mark Schauer, Tim Walberg

(Thanks to the multiple people that e-mailed me about this.)

On his "Crystal Ball" website, Larry Sabato of the University of Virginia's Center for Politics, published his "next-to-last" predictions for Election Day 2008. They're pretty good for the Democrats all around, but here's the part that matters to me the most:

I don't know if you can see it on there, but "MI-07 (Walberg)" is under the "Democratic Pick-up" column. Yeah, it's just one prediction, and it won't matter at all in five days. But it's good to see anyway.

Mind you, this is no time to get overconfident. Mark Schauer is going to need everyone's help to get out the vote.

Labels: 2008 Election, 2008 Speculation, Mark Schauer, Tim Walberg

This showed up all over the internet, but is definitely worth repeating here. A Republican memo leaked to U.S. News & World Report had the expected losses for the GOP on Election Day:

The document provided to Whispers is no gag: It comes from one of the key House GOP vote counters. The source called it a "death list." The tally shows several different ratings of 66 House Republicans in difficult races or open seats held by retiring Republicans. "Rating 1" finds 10 Republicans "likely gone." Those districts are New York 13, Alaska, Arizona 1, Virginia 11, New York 25, Illinois 11, Florida 24, Michigan 7, Nevada 3, and North Carolina 8.

(Emphasis added.)

Ouch. Congressman Walberg, your party says you're going to lose!

Mind you, now isn't the time to be overconfident. Go sign up to volunteer to get out the vote!

Labels: 2008 Election, 2008 Speculation, Tim Walberg

Democracy Corps is a group founded by Bill Clinton adviser James Carville and pollser Stanley Greenberg which advises Democrats and analyzes elections. Every so often, they release a "battleground poll" surveying the most competitive congressional races in the country. Although they don't give any information broken down by district, they use this to analyze national trends.

In 2008, Michigan's 7th District is listed in "Tier 1" of Republican-held seats, along with 19 others. In total, 50 districts were included in the survey.

The whole report is worth reading if you're a political junkie. I thought I'd share a few interesting items. Remember, this isn't a poll of the 7th District, but it's a poll that includes the 7th District.

The financial crisis, which had not yet reached its peak when this survey was in the field, is driving a deepening anger across the country and in these Republican districts. Just 14 percent of likely voters believe the country is heading in the right direction, the lowest number we have seen in our Democracy Corps congressional polling, even in this Republican battleground. The intensely negative mood is more directed at Republicans, who are seeing their brand continue to erode. President Bush remains toxic and the Republican Party is now significantly less popular than the Democrats, even in this more conservative battleground.

and

Democratic candidates are taking advantage of this favorable environment and now hold a 49 percent to 45 percent lead in the 40-seat Republican battleground.>[2] This is a broad lead – with Democrats holding equal 4-point cushions in the top tier of races, the 20 most vulnerable seats, and in the second tier, the next 20 districts.� If the election were held today, Democrats would be poised to win, perhaps, well upwards of 20 Republican seats.

and

... In fact, Republican incumbents are losing further ground, being dragged down by the toxic environment and unpopular GOP brand. As disdain for Washington has increased, the Republican incumbents have failed to establish their independence from Bush or their party. Since May, the percent saying Republican incumbents are not independent has risen from 45 to 53 percent while the percent saying these incumbents follow Bush’s direction too much has jumped from 40 to 49 percent.>[3]

and

Meanwhile, 48 percent now disagree that Republican incumbents are “on your side,” up from 40 percent four months ago. This key attribute is another important driver of the vote in our regressions. As a result of this poor performance on so many attributes, a near majority of 48 percent of voters in these 40 Republican districts now say they simply can’t vote to reelect their incumbent congressman and in a named matchup, the Democratic challengers lead these incumbents 49-45.

(Emphasis added.)

By now, I've probably exceeded fair use guidlines, but there's a lot more in the full report that's worth reading. It doesn't mean that Tim Walberg will lose to Mark Schauer, but it does mean that we're part of a nationwide trend toward the Democrats this year. If you're a Democrat, you've got a lot of reasons to be optimistic.

Labels: 2008 Election, 2008 Speculation, James Carville, Poll, Stan Greenberg

While you're all watching Senators McCain and Obama, I thought I'd finally get around to writing more about the poll the Schauer campaign released. Just for a reminder, here's what the poll found:

Mark Schauer vs. Tim Walberg

Mark Schauer (D) - 42 (37)
Tim Walberg (R-inc.) - 36 (40)

Mark Schauer vs. Tim Walberg (Plus Undecideds, allocated based on stated partisan leanings)

Mark Schauer (D) - 48 (45)
Tim Walberg (R-inc.) - 41 (47)

Name Recognition

Mark Schauer (D) - 67 (42)
Tim Walberg (R-inc.) - 76 (74)

Walberg Job Performance

Positive (Good or Excellent) - 34 (34)
Negative (Fair or Poor) - 46 (42)

So, what does all of this mean? Schauer's pollster, Andrew Myers, picks out one important finding:

This survey demonstrates that Schauer’s communications are clearly taking root. Today Schauer is known by 67 percent of voters, a substantial 25 point jump in identification since May

That's the big one, much more than the 42-36 headline. It shows that Schauer's breaking out of his Senate district and getting more attention elsewhere in the district. This is good-- it means the money they're spending on television ads and field organizing is working. It shows that the overall strategy of introducing Schauer to more voters is working. Remember, Schauer doesn't have to win Lenawee County or Hillsdale County to win the election, he just has to not lose too badly, and then perform well in his base. Man, I'd love to see a geographical breakdown of the results.

Of course, by running mostly attack ads, Walberg might be helping to increase Schauer's name recognition. Walberg's attacks might drive up some of Schauer's negatives, but it also makes sure people know that there's an alternative to Tim Walberg. Oh, the irony.

But let's get back to that headline. Schauer leads, 42 to 36. But it's also an internal poll, commissioned by Mark Schauer through a Democratic polling outfit. It must be rigged, right?

No. Just like Walberg's internal poll released a couple of months ago, I don't doubt that the poll was conducted with fair, legitimate polling practices. It's not in anyone's interest to pay for inaccurate polling-- the Schauer campaign probably cares a lot more about getting useful information than about sending out a good press release and having a favorable news cycle.

Does that mean that this poll is accurate? No, not necessarily. A 95 percent confidence level means that 95 percent of the time, the poll will be correct to within the stated margin of error (in this case, 4.38 percent). Schauer's lead is within the margin of error, though it's better to be leading and within the margin of error than losing. But it's also possible that this is one of those 5 percent polls (like I think Walberg's was), where it's not accurate by more than the margin.

Supposing Schauer's poll is absolutely correct, this is a big deal. There are still a lot of undecideds-- and a lot of people who are paying close attention to Obama-McCain, but haven't thought about Schauer-Walberg. But among those that are decided, Schauer is leading a sitting congressman by six points. That's a tough thing to do.

I don't know that I'm saying anything new or interesting tonight, I just wanted to share a few thoughts. It's a good poll for Schauer.

Labels: 2008 Election, 2008 Speculation, Mark Schauer, Poll, Tim Walberg

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee announced in July that it would be reserving $1.5 million in advertising time in Michigan's 7th District. The Politico.com brings us the response from the National Republican Congressional Committee:

The Republicans' campaign arm in the House has reserved another round of television ads to prop up their vulnerable GOP colleagues this fall.

[...]

With this latest round of reservations, the NRCC will be playing defense in 21 of the 26 races where the committee has secured airtime. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has secured time in many of these districts - a strong sign that the party in power could pad its majority in the House this fall.

[...]

In Michigan, the NRCC has reserved $618,000 to protect veteran Rep. Joe Knollenberg and $832,000 to help freshman Rep. Tim Walberg.

(Emphasis added.)

There's really not much more to say here. The GOP is playing defense, and, for now, has decided that Tim Walberg is worth fighting to protect. But when the DCCC has more cash-on-hand than the NRCC ($56,456,584 to $14,233,074 as of the end of July), they'll be able to push hard across all 21 districts that the NRCC is defending and more. When faced with limited resources, I still say there's a chance the Republican leaders may choose to protect an older incumbent (and longtime friend) over the freshman from Michigan.

Of course, Walberg has the Club for Growth and now Freedom's Watch on his side, so there'll still be plenty of money available to rush to his defense.

Labels: 2008 Election, 2008 Speculation, Advertising, DCCC, NRCC, Republican Party, Tim Walberg

UPDATE: Full poll results are at the bottom, via WXYZ.

For the Detroit News, EPIC-MRA brings us a new poll:

Walberg of Tipton leads Schauer, a state senator from Battle Creek by 43-40 percent, which is within the poll's 4.9-point error margin. A decisive 14 percent of voters in the district are undecided.

[...]

The Knollenberg-Peters poll was conducted from Aug. 21-23; the Walberg-Schauer survey was done from Aug. 20-22. Each was conducted among 400 likely voters.

[...]

Walberg, 57, and Schauer, 47, are battling over a district that includes all of five counties -- Eaton, Jackson, Lenawee, Hillsdale and Branch -- and most of Calhoun and Washtenaw counties.

Voters, by 43-32 percent, give Walberg negative ratings for his job performance.

Pollster Porn said a finding in the poll shows Schauer must go on the attack if he is to win. When voters were read the biographies of both candidates, they favored Walberg 46-44 percent.

"Schauer needs to run an aggressive, hard-hitting campaign against Walberg," Porn said. "If Schauer thinks he can run a positive campaign, that will not be enough for that district, because it is too Republican. He needs to contrast with the Walberg record."

Walberg knocked off a less conservative Republican incumbent, Joe Schwarz, in 2006, and some Democratic strategists believe he is too conservative for a majority of voters in the district.

B.J. Neidhardt, Schauer's campaign manager, said the poll numbers come as Walberg has had a TV ad up since Aug. 6, while his candidate has yet to air an air.

"The numbers show voters aren't buying what Congressman Walberg is selling," Neidhardt said.

(Emphasis added.)

The Schauer campaign sent out a press release:

NEW INDEPENDENT POLL SHOWS DEAD HEAT IN MICHIGAN'S 7TH DISTRICT

Walberg trails in fundraising, losing ground after several weeks of paid advertising

BATTLE CREEK—Tonight a new poll released by EPIC-MRA for Detroit News/WXYZ indicated that the race between state Senator Mark Schauer (D-Battle Creek) and Congressman Tim Walberg in Michigan's 7th Congressional district was a statistical dead heat. The news represents a huge fall in standing for Walberg, who has been advertising on television for more than three weeks and spent hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars communicating with voters through automated robocalls, on the radio, in newspaper inserts, and in the mailbox.

"This poll reflects the momentum we've been seeing on the ground for the past several months," said B.J. Neidhardt, Campaign Manager for Mark Schauer's campaign. "People simply aren't buying what Tim Walberg is selling, and Mark has the message and the momentum to win this race in November."

The independent poll released tonight showed a statistical dead heat with Schauer at 40% and Walberg at 43%, well within the 4.9% margin of error. The complete story can be found at:

[Link]

In the second quarter, Schauer's campaign out-raised incumbent Tim Walberg for the fourth straight filing period, bringing in more than $427,000. Over the course of the campaign, Schauer has brought in more than $1.33 million and raised more than Tim Walberg's total contributions for the entire 2006 election cycle.

Background:

• The previous EPIC-MRA poll, released in March, showed Tim Walberg leading 51-40.

# # #

This really does look bad for Walberg. He's still leading, and, contrary to the Schauer press release, it's not a "dead heat," but it is within the margin of error. That's a lot closer than it should be for an incumbent in a lean-Republican district. It's certainly a lot closer than the internal poll the Walberg campaign released last month.

As the Schauer campaign points out, this also comes after a few weeks of Walberg being on the air, yet he's losing ground against a challenger who has yet to really advertise. Both sides are the beneficiaries (and victims) of independent attacks.

Perhaps more significant than the Walberg-Schauer result is the job performance result. Recall:

Voters, by 43-32 percent, give Walberg negative ratings for his job performance.

That's ridiculously awful. A net 11 point disapproval means that even the Republican base is disappointed in him. I'd be interested to see where Schauer stands on name identification. If it's still relatively low, combined with Walberg's negative ratings, then we can expect to see the race tighten further. Maybe this isn't a conservative district after all!

-----

Via WXYZ, the full results.

7TH DISTRICT RESULTS

Overall, would you say that things in the United States are generally headed in the right direction, or have things pretty seriously gotten off on the wrong track?

8% Right direction
78% Wrong track
14% Undecided/Don’t know/Refused

How about in Michigan – Do you think that things in Michigan are generally headed in the right direction, or are things pretty seriously off on the wrong track?

10% Right direction
82% Wrong track
8% Undecided/Don’t know/Refused

Now, I would like to read a list of several political figures. For each one, please tell me if you recognize the name, and whether you have a favorable or unfavorable opinion of that person.

George W. Bush
- Favorable - 32%
- Unfavorable - 61%

Jennifer Granholm
- Favorable - 40%
- Unfavorable - 52%

Barack Obama
- Favorable - 44%
- Unfavorable - 36%

John McCain
- Favorable - 46%
- Unfavorable - 34%

Mark Schauer
- Favorable - 25%
- Unfavorable - 15%

Tim Walberg
- Favorable - 39%
- Unfavorable - 29%

Overall, how would you rate the job being done by George W. Bush as President -- would you give him a positive rating of excellent or pretty good, or a negative rating of just fair or poor?

TOTAL POSITIVE - 24%
TOTAL NEGATIVE – 73%
Overall, how would you rate the job being done by Jennifer Granholm as Michigan’s Governor – would you give her a positive rating of excellent or pretty good, or a negative rating of just fair or poor?

TOTAL POSITIVE - 26%
TOTAL NEGATIVE - 71%

How would you rate the job being done by Tim Walberg in the United States Congress – would you give him a positive rating of excellent or pretty good, or a negative rating of just fair or poor?

TOTAL POSITIVE - 32%
TOTAL NEGATIVE - 43%

Over the next six months to a year, do you think Michigan’s economy will improve, get worse, or remain about the same?

18% Improve
29% Get worse
48% Remain about the same
5% Undecided/Don’t know/Refused

In the election for President, if the election were held today, would you vote for John McCain the Republican, Barack Obama the Democrat, Ralph Nader the Independent, or Bob Barr the Libertarian?

TOTAL OBAMA - 39%
TOTAL McCAIN - 43%
TOTAL NADER - 3%
TOTAL BARR - 3%

If the November general election for U.S. Senate were held today, would you vote for Jack Hoogendyk the Republican, Carl Levin the Democrat, Harley Mikkelson of the Green Party, Michael Nikitin of the U.S. Taxpayers Party, Scotty Boman the Libertarian, or Doug Dern of the Natural Law Party?

TOTAL LEVIN - 46%
TOTAL HOOGENDYK - 28%
TOTAL MIKKELSON - 1%
TOTAL NIKITIN - 0%
TOTAL BOMAN - 2%
TOTAL DERN - 0%

If the election for U.S. Congress were held today, would you vote for Mark Schauer the Democrat, Tim Walberg the Republican, Lynn Meadow of the Green Party, or Ken Proctor the Libertarian?

TOTAL WALBERG - 43%
TOTAL SCHAUER - 40%
TOTAL MEADOWS - 1%
TOTAL PROCTOR - 2%

Now I would like to read a brief description of the two major party candidates running for congress.

Tim Walberg is 57 years old and the incumbent Republican. He was born on the south side of Chicago. After graduating from high school he became a member of the U.S. Forest Service. To pay his way through college, he worked as a union steel mill worker, attended Western Illinois University, Taylor University, Moody Bible Institute, where he was trained as a minister, and Wheaton College Graduate School, where he earned his B.S. and M.A. degrees. He was a pastor for 10 years, then served in the Michigan House of Representatives from Lenawee County for 18 years. In the 2006, he defeated the incumbent Republican by campaigning on a platform of support for President Bush’s war on terror and opposition to pork barrel spending. Walberg is a social and economic conservative, taking a strong pro-life position on abortion and supporting traditional marriage. He and his wife Sue have been married for 34 years, raised three children and live in Tipton in Lenawee County.

Mark Schauer is 47 years old and the Democratic leader of the Michigan State Senate, representing Calhoun and Jackson Counties since 2003. Before that, he served in the Michigan House of Representatives. Born in Howell, he was his class Valedictorian and then graduated with honors from Albion College. He worked as an urban planner for Calhoun County while continuing his college education, earning Masters Degrees in Public Administration from Western Michigan and Political Science from Michigan State. He worked for and later became the Director of the Community Action Agency in Battle Creek, was a founding member of the Battle Creek Habitat for Humanity, and an active supporter of the Food Bank. He has been a strong advocate of quality schools, early childhood development, job training, economic development, access to quality health care, and he is pro-choice on the abortion issue. He and his wife Christine live in Battle Creek with his three step children.

After hearing these descriptions, let me ask you again, if the election for U.S. Congress were held today, would you vote for Mark Schauer the Democrat, Tim Walberg the Republican, Lynn Meadow of the Green Party, or Ken Proctor the Libertarian?

TOTAL WALBERG - 46%
TOTAL SCHAUER - 44%
TOTAL MEADOWS - 0%
TOTAL PROCTOR - 1%

There's a lot to digest there.

UPDATE II: Fixed typos.

Labels: 2008 Election, 2008 Speculation, Mark Schauer, Poll, Tim Walberg

A short post now, then I've got a much more important post coming up next.

Today, Congressman Walberg held his Lenawee County Campaign Kickoff:

WALBERG LENAWEE CAMPAIGN KICKOFF RALLY

Friday, August 22, 2008
10:00am

Join us at Next Diesel
1571 W. Beecher Rd.
Adrian, MI 49221

Congressman Walberg as well as several community leaders will be speaking.

Come on out, pick up your yard sign, and show your support for your Congressman!

Recall that Lenawee County is Walberg's home county. He's lived in Tipton for years, knows everybody, and won the county with 55 percent of the vote against Sharon Renier, won it with 69 percent in the 2006 GOP primary against Joe Schwarz, and won it with 57 percent in a six-way primary in 2004. In other words, this is his base.

I spoke earlier with someone who attended Walberg's kickoff rally. How many people showed up?

10.

Including staff.

Contrast this with Mark Schauer's town hall in Adrian a couple of weeks before the primary, which had somewhere between 60 and 70 people attend.

Walberg's still got the advantage, but he can only draw a crowd of 10 in Lenawee County? If that's true, then he's got plenty of reasons to be worried about November.

Labels: 2008 Election, 2008 Speculation, Mark Schauer, Tim Walberg

I've repeated a number of times that the internet is still the best untapped resource for political campaigns to reach out to supporters and win over undecided voters. Mark Schauer has been doing a fantastic job, with a number of innovative ideas and embracing dynamic content. Up until the primary, Tim Walberg's attempts at using the internet were disappointing.

This may be changing. Tim Walberg's campaign has significantly increased his internet operation, now with a website, a blog, a Twitter feed, a Facebook page, and a YouTube channel. So far, this is impressive-- though, it's worth noting that Mark Schauer had all of these long before Walberg, with the exception of the Twitter feed.


So does this mean that Tim Walberg is pulling even with Mark Schauer on the internet? Well, no, not yet.

On the brand new Walberg for Congress blog, there is exactly one post as of today. It's very nice, with photos and whatnot, but it came last Wednesday, and so far, there hasn't been any indication of any more activity. Contrast this with the Schauer blog, where Senator Schauer and his communications director have something new to say every day, including information that might actually be useful for supporters.

On the Walberg for Congress YouTube channel, there is only one video, the first Walberg campaign ad. That's fine, because it'll get greater exposure for your ad and its message. But Mark Schauer's YouTube page has 16 videos so far. Of those, eight are of Schauer speaking directly to viewers and to voters, and another six are of public appearances where he's speaking about policy. Rather than five scripted lines and a motorcycle, Schauer is talking about the issues that people care about, and he's effectively using the medium.



The point this, of course, is to show that Walberg's internet operation is still lacking compared to Schauer's. But it doesn't have to be. As much as I want to see Mark Schauer elected, I'd also like to see candidates in both parties effectively use technology to reach voters. Schauer's team is doing that. Walberg's team has all of the pieces in place, but hasn't bothered to use them yet. If they do, then we could have an exciting race on our hands.

Labels: 2008 Election, 2008 Speculation, Mark Schauer, Netroots, Tim Walberg

Back in July, the Green Party of Michigan held its convention in Marshall, Michigan. As is often the case with minor parties, I completely forgot about it. Nevertheless, it is still worth reporting that at their meeting, they nominated Chelsea resident Lynn Meadows for Michigan's 7th Congressional District.

From what I can tell, Meadows is actually a fairly big name in the MI Greens, as the chair of the Tamarack Greens and having been their Secretary of State nominee in 2006. For that office, she won 70,218 votes statewide, or about 1.9 percent of the vote. Across the 7th District, she stayed fairly consistent, right around the two percent mark.

So how will she fare as a congressional candidate? As the Secretary of State candidate, she out-performed the rest of the Green ticket in 2006-- their nominees for Senate and Governor each got less than one percent. However, she was also the only minor party candidate running for that office, which meant that the 1.9 percent that she earned included those who were simply dissatisfied with the Republican and Democratic Parties and wanted to voice their frustration in a low-profile race.

The Green Party did not field a candidate in 2006, but in 2004, nominee Jason Seagraves took 1.3 percent of the vote, or 3,996 votes.

It'll be interesting to see if Meadows runs a strong campaign this year. I'm not expecting her to break two percent, but, then again, that's still two percent in what could be a very close race.

With this and Schauer's primary victory, we have our final November ballot:

Tim Walberg (R-inc.)
Mark Schauer (D)
Ken Proctor (L)
Lynn Meadows (G)

As of July 09, 2008, I have been working with the Schauer for Congress campaign in Lenawee County. My thoughts and writings are my own opinions, and I do not speak for Senator Schauer or anyone else in his organization.

Labels: 2004 Election, 2006 Election, 2008 Election, 2008 Speculation, Green Party, Lynn Meadows

Via Swing State Project, which was via Hotline, the Walberg campaign released an internal poll:

Mark Schauer (D): 31
Tim Walberg (R-inc): 47

Margin of Error +/- 5.7%, over July 8th and 9th, surveying 300 "likely voters" conducted by National Research.

I have a few thoughts on this poll.

For starters, it doesn't look good. Walberg leading by 16 points hurts. Obviously, we (meaning both the Schauer campaign and concerned voters in general) need to do a better job.

At the same time, there are some things that make me a little suspicious of whether or not this is actually the real state of the race. This is an internal poll, commissioned for Tim Walberg, but that doesn't mean it isn't accurate. It's not in their interest to get bad data. However, they do get to sit on it for as long as they want without showing it to the media, which they did. The poll was taken early in July, and they kept it quiet until they had a bad news cycle (with Schauer outraising Walberg again).

That means that this could be one of multiple polls they've commissioned over the last few months. It's in their interest to only release favorable polls, so they can just sit the results they're getting until they get one that looks good. It's not dishonest and it's still statistically accurate-- for those that recall their high school math classes, you know that one in twenty polls will be off by more than the margin of error. That's just statistics.

So, I don't doubt that Walberg is leading or that his campaign got that data in their poll. All I doubt is whether that's the only data they have. They probably have other polls taken other times that aren't nearly as favorable, but decided to release this one. I don't believe that Tim Walberg is leading by 16 points.

--------------------

So, I thought I posted the above last night. Apparently, Blogger disagreed, and I went to bed not knowing that it didn't show up, nor did other things I had written. Hrm.

I discovered this a few minutes ago, moments after I also discovered another internal poll in my inbox, this time conducted for the Schauer campaign. For this one, I have a little more information.

This poll was conducted by Meyers Research & Strategic Services over May 8 to 15, 2008, surveying 600 "likely voters." The margin of error is +/- 4.0 percent.

When asked about the Schauer-Walberg match-up, the poll found:

Mark Schauer (D): 37
Tim Walberg (R-inc): 40

When undecided voters were "allocated to candidates based on their self-described partisan leanings," it was:

Mark Schauer (D): 45
Tim Walberg (R-inc): 47

They also tested two other races. Incumbent Democratic Senator Carl Levin leads Republican Jack Hoogendyk by 15 percent and Senators Barack Obama and John McCain are tied in the district at 42 percent each.

Other findings, from pollster Andrew Myers:

On other key measures Walberg also proves wounded. Walberg’s re-elect is an abysmal 35 percent, with one-third of voters saying they would prefer someone new (33 percent), and perceptions of his job performance remain net negative as well, with just 34 percent saying he is doing an excellent to good job, while a plurality, 42 percent, say fair to poor.

Today, Schauer is identified by 42 percent of voters and continues to earn a better than two-to-one warm to cool ratio, 23 percent warm, favorable reviews, and 9 percent cool, unfavorable reviews. Walberg, on the other hand, remains far better known than Schauer from the start, with 74 percent able to identify him, but his warm to cool ratio is less than two-to-one, 36 percent warm, 23 percent cool.

While the contest remains generally unchanged, there is evidence that voters are ready for change. Specifically, while voters were sour to begin with in our survey in August, this electorate has soured further, and just two-in-ten voters today report that things in the United States are on the right track, while seven-in-ten say they are pretty seriously off on the wrong track.

Bottom line, this contest remains close despite Walberg’s significant expenditures on
incumbency protection, and Walberg remains critically wounded on every key measure for an incumbent. Voters appear more aligned for change today, and Schauer will have the resources to press the case come Election Day.

(Emphasis added.)

So, where does this leave us? Obviously, the same notes on the Walberg poll above apply here. The Schauer campaign sat on this until they needed it-- this time, for two-and-a-half months. As far as the actual state of the race, I'm inclined to think that it's closer to three points than sixteen. Chances are, Walberg's lead is somewhere in the five to 10 range.

But Eric at Michigan Liberal picks out the other significant finding:

I don't put a great deal of stock in polling, especially 100 days out and super especially internal polls. The story here, I think, is that not even Walberg's own internal polling has him above 50 percent, which is just not good news for him especially since he's being outraised.

(Emphasis added.)

He's right about that. An incumbent under the 50 percent has a metaphorical target painted on his back. If the national Republican Party is forced to prioritize which seats they're going to defend, they're not going to pick the guy whose own polls show him doing badly.

Now, what we really need is some independent and transparent polling. There are a lot of questions that could be asked about the candidates and the issues, and I'd love to see a county-by-county breakdown of the race. I'd do it myself, but I'm only one man!

As of July 09, 2008, I have been working with the Schauer for Congress campaign in Lenawee County. My thoughts and writings are my own opinions, and I do not speak for Senator Schauer or anyone else in his organization.

NOTE: This disclaimer was added a few days late... I keep forgetting to add it at the end.

Labels: 2008 Election, 2008 Speculation, Mark Brewer, Poll, Tim Walberg

Given the fact that I started this website and am active in the Michigan and national blogosphere, I'm assuming that its pretty obvious that I think internet-based political campaigning is both important and an exciting development in politics. You can reach potential voters more cheaply than traditional mailings, you can do it without bothering people with "robocalls," and you can target voting groups that might not ordinarily be recipients of the standard direct mail and door-to-door campaigns (especially young people). It's simply too good of an opportunity to pass up.

Back in October of 2007, I wrote up an overview of the internet operations of Mark Schauer, Sharon Renier, and Tim Walberg. That piece was in the context of something Jerome Armstrong wrote last year for the New Politics Institute, a memo which still serves as a strong set of guidelines for any campaign that wants to use the internet. While the whole thing is worth reading, I will share here only the six recommendations I mentioned last time:

Six Things You Can Do Now

Bloggers will be your frontline of defense against attacks. Having them as allies is an important focus for any organization. Here are six things that any progressive organization can do today:

1. Take the first step with outreach to local bloggers:

This is something that should already have been done, but it’s never too late start. If the relationship doesn’t exist, reach out today. Rather than focusing on national bloggers, focus on those within your state first, as many of the national bloggers look to the state-based blogs for identifying which races to target as highly competitive. Have the leaders of your organization or campaign touch base with local bloggers,. Set up a conference call with local bloggers asking for feedback, encouraging coordination, and providing updates.

2. Have a daily-updated website to engage and empower the bloggers:

If you are not putting out timely everyday information, then people who want to get involved are coming to the website and leaving empty-handed. The format is not as important as the information. Email your entire list, tell them to visit the website everyday for the latest news and ways that they can help. Event information, the latest news, resources to counter the opposition, all of this is important information to your supporters and bloggers. It keeps them stay engaged and fired up, willing to go the extra step in their volunteer activities. Your website should be an open door for volunteers and the blogs to engage with you.

3. Be on the blogs and advertise on the blogs:

Organizations and campaigns often have news, such as a poll or new campaign material, that will be of interest to your supporters. But it’s not enough to just put it on your website. You should also get it on the blogs. You can buy advertising on smaller local blogs for $100 or less per month, so there is no reason not to take advantage of this valuable resource. Having an ad on the blogs is also a good way to make your cause or campaign known to the blogger community. You can change any ads on blogads with your latest push too. Go to blogads.com and you will be able to search by state to find the blogs near you.

4. Get your opposition research onto the blogs:

Still got that dirt on your opponent that nobody knows? It’s useless if you don’t get it out to the people who make news. You probably have something a local blogger could use, but you’ll never know if you don’t get that info out of its manila folder and onto the web. By now, you ought to have local online allies that you can trust enough to give the scoop. Got a story that has a good hook? Feed it to the bloggers. Short stories that are personalized have the best chance at being posted. If the blogs cover it, then go to the more traditional news outlets, and press them to cover the story as well.

5. Use YouTube:

It is best if you are creating video for the web instead of re-produced television ads, but your TV commercials can also be put to good use on the web too. YouTube.com allows you to easily upload your commercials for free and then put them on your website, email them to bloggers, and send them out to voters. Chances are, your local bloggers will link to your ad or put it on their website, giving you broader coverage.

5. Create a web presence on Facebook, MySpace and other social networking sites:

The most recent addition to netroots outreach is on the websites that have been used as social networking websites that have extended into activist networking around candidates and organizations. Having a presence on these websites is something that an organization should do, but maintaining one through the usage of the platform is what will engage the users of these platforms. Facebook and MySpace are two of the early movers in this space, and for those looking to do outreach into youth organizations and colleges, these sites are very important.

(Yes, he numbered them wrong. I'm sure that Jerome will proof-read more closely next time.)

Last time around, I went through and offered my thoughts on each candidate in the context of each recommendation. I'm not going to do that again, but it's important to have these recommendations in mind. This time, I'd just like to share the state of the internet race as it stands now, and offer some thoughts.

Ken Proctor - Libertarian Nominee

I'm starting with Ken Proctor because he has, by far, the worst website of the bunch. Why is that? For starters, it's still got the "thank you" message from his last run for office, when he ran against Bart Stupak in the 1st Congressional District. Unlike Ron Paul, whose supporters managed to tap into the strong libertarian leanings of many on the internet, Ken Proctor has done little to take advantage of that energy. Frankly, I'm not surprised. I just didn't want to leave anyone out.

Tim Walberg - Republican Incumbent (Presumptive nominee)

I can't figure Tim Walberg out. On the one hand, he's been quick to embrace all of the appearances of taking internet-based campaigning seriously. He has his own blog on his official House website, he's reached out to RightMichigan.com, Townhall.com, and uses The Hill's congressional blog. Now, he even has a Facebook page, which currently has 283 supporters. From all of this, it looks like he's taking the internet seriously.

... Then there's his campaign website. Honestly, it's horrible. It's not just the low-resolution .jpg images in the top sidebar, though that always bugs me. The design is counter-intuitive, the front page is kind of empty, and the content is lacking. (Only four issues, and each with less than two paragraphs of text? Only one press release? No photos?)

Really, Congressman? Is that the best you can come up with?

But it's worse than that. The campaign website has nothing of the "Web 2.0" innovations that have made online activism so interesting. There is no video, even though his press office has made an effort to put some videos on YouTube. There's no blog and there's nothing to allow any user or voter feedback. Every so often, they update their "Upcoming Events," but usually, that section is empty. There's nothing dynamic or interesting about it, and every page is static and, frankly, boring.

The purpose of the Walberg for Congress website is not to engage voters. Instead, it's designed to serve as a repository for press releases-- except that they haven't bothered to put any up yet.

Sharon Renier - Democratic Candidate

Sadly, as disappointing as Walberg's website was, Sharon Renier's is a step lower. Although she has written a great deal about the issues, she lacks the same features I mention above. Her "News/Press" page only has one story and her "Events" page is still a .pdf flyer for "Votestock," which is now over. Even Walberg updates his "Upcoming Events" some of the time!

For Renier, whose campaign doesn't have a lot of money to work with, a strong internet presence would be a valuable investment. Not only is it cheap, but it has the potential of bringing in more contributions. I just don't get why Proctor, Walberg, and Renier haven't put more time into this.

Mark Schauer - Democratic Candidate

Mark Schauer, on the other hand, has been doing it right. His website, though a little cluttered, is aesthetically pleasing and has plenty of pages linked from it. But it's not just content in the form of issue positions and press releases. There are numerous features that keep a casual viewer on the page-- video, action items, and even a form for you to share your thoughts on issues. This is in addition to the Facebook page (with 403 supporters as of today).

Simply put, Schauer's website isn't boring, and it'll keep people interested and on it. It sounds superficial, but the longer a regular voter stays on your page, the more likely they are to absorb the information you want to convey.

But it also doesn't have to be a one-way conversation. Today, the Schauer for Congress campaign announced the new campaign blog, which the senator promises to update regularly. Now, part of it is just that I'm a big fan of blogs, but it's not just that. In addition to creating and quickly updating content, it allows readers to give immediate feedback. While Senator Schauer himself might not see it right away, someone from his campaign certainly will, and can (hopefully) address concerns.

Now, there are still things Schauer could do. When Senator Chris Dodd was running for president, he and adviser Tim Tagaris experimented with live webcasts of campaign events and the senator backstage. The Obama campaign has merchandise that can be purchased and counts as a campaign contribution, and has the "MyBarackObama" section, so that supporters can have their own corner of the website. Innovations like that would be incredible.

Even so, MarkSchauer.com is light-years ahead of the other campaign websites. Politics has changed dramatically in even the last five years, thanks in large part to new technology. The Schauer campaign seems to get that fact, but the others haven't caught up.

As with the previous post on the subject, this is just an overview, but it's an important aspect of the campaign that deserves more attention. Will a pretty website win an election? No, probably not. But it's a smart investment, and it really doesn't cost that much.

As of July 09, 2008, I have been working with the Schauer for Congress campaign in Lenawee County. My thoughts and writings are my own opinions, and I do not speak for Senator Schauer or anyone else in his organization.

Labels: 2008 Election, 2008 Speculation, Ken Proctor, Mark Schauer, Netroots, Sharon Renier, Tim Walberg

Once again via Swing State Project, we get this:

WASHINGTON (AP) — House Democrats have reserved millions of dollars worth of television advertising in 31 congressional races in all corners of the country, according to documentation that provides an early roadmap of the party's drive to strengthen its majority in the fall elections.

[...]

In all, the documentation obtained by The Associated Press shows the DCCC has reserved nearly $35 million in advertising to begin in September and October.

[...]

Political parties and candidates frequently reserve advertising time in advance to obtain a lower price from television stations than might be available later. Final decisions on spending are normally made closer to the elections.

According to SSP, Michigan's 7th District is getting $1.5 million of the $35 million total. That puts us in a tie with Florida's 16th District for the sixth largest amount being spent of the 31 races being targeted. This is, perhaps, because of the high cost of advertising in our district, as I've highlighted before.

Just because they're reserving $1.5 million doesn't mean they'll use all of it, and it doesn't mean that they'll only spend that much. This is just another indicator that we're going to be in a top-tier and very expensive race.

As of July 09, 2008, I have been working with the Schauer for Congress campaign in Lenawee County. My thoughts and writings are my own opinions, and I do not speak for Senator Schauer or anyone else in his organization.

Labels: 2008 Election, 2008 Speculation, Advertising, DCCC, Media Markets

Last week, I briefly examined the media markets which cover the 7th District and commented on their cost, wondering what role it would play in the race. You may recall this handy map:


Inspired by the same FiveThirtyEight.com post, Swing State Project blogger Crisitunity created what he calls the "Bang-for-the-Buck Index" of House races. As he explains:

Time for the thrilling conclusion to the Bang-for-the-Buck Index, begun yesterday with the Senate installment. Follow the link for full methodological nitty-gritty, but the main thing that you need to know is that this index shows which races are the cheapest media-wise (and thus where one netroots dollar gets stretched the furthest). This list covers all House races that Swing State Project projects as Dem pickup opportunities.

The middle column lists every media market that needs to be utilized in order to blanket the district, and the number next to each market is the number of thousands of TV households in that market. The more TV households, the more expensive the market. (When a market only grazes a small part of the district where there's no major population center, I've deemed the market negligible, assuming that a smart media buyer wouldn't use that market.) The number in the right column is the sum total of the thousands of TV households in all markets in the district, which provides a relative number that indicates how expensive a media campaign in that district is.

As you'll see, there's a huge amount of variation, depending on the number of 'wasted eyeballs.' The wasted eyeballs problem becomes huge in suburban districts in major metropolitan districts, where you may be paying to advertise to people in the adjacent 10 or 20 districts as well.

In his index of competitive House races, his entry for Michigan's 7th District is:

MI-07

Detroit (1,936) Toledo (427) Lansing (257) Grand Rapids (732)

3,352

In other words, in our district, advertising in all four markets which cover us is the equivalent of advertising to 3.3 million television households. For comparison, the Philadelphia market is only 2.9 million television households, while Chicago's market barely edges us out, with 3.4 million television households. As he stated in his post, the more households, the more expensive it is.

This makes the 7th District the 15th most expensive district in Crisitunity's list (with about 80 districts on the list as possible Democratic pick-ups), mainly following districts covered by the New York (7.4 million), Los Angeles (5.5 million), and Chicago (3.4 million) markets.

As Crisitunity continues:

You may have also noticed a number of predominantly rural districts that should theoretically be cheap but in fact are very expensive; MI-07 and NC-08 are key examples, each of which are kind of located between major cities and wind up biting a corner out of a bunch of different markets. Poor PA-05 is the perhaps the worst example; it doesn't even have any TV stations in its boundaries, but it takes bites out of about 8 surrounding markets. Districts like these, again, are probably dealt with creatively, with buys in some TV markets and more focus on cable and other media.

As with the previous post on this subject, I don't have a profound conclusion on this, but it's something I find interesting.

As of July 09, 2008, I have been working with the Schauer for Congress campaign in Lenawee County. My thoughts and writings are my own opinions, and I do not speak for Senator Schauer or anyone else in his organization.

Labels: 2008 Speculation, Advertising, Fundraising, Media Markets

As we get closer to Election Day, I'm hoping to spend some more time on other races that will be appearing on the ballot, and how they relate to the 7th District race. That is, I won't be arguing in favor of Barack Obama or against John McCain, but I will be writing about how the presidential race might have an impact on Tim Walberg's reelection bid. I gave a very general overview of state House races back in May for similar reasons. After all, this election isn't taking place in a vacuum.

When it comes to races that could have the biggest impact on the 7th District outcome, you have to list the presidential race at the top. Michigan is an important swing state, and both the McCain and Obama campaigns will be running massive voter turnout efforts. But today, I'd like to focus more on the role of Senator John McCain as a candidate and his relationship with Tim Walberg.

Let's start with what Senator McCain and Congressman Walberg have in common: they're Republicans. After that, it gets a little bit trickier. Recall this article from 2004 about Walberg and Joe Schwarz:

The 7th District is one of this year's most hotly contested Congressional primary races, where Congressman Nick Smith is retiring from his longtime seat. It is a secure Republican post, so whoever wins the August 3 primary will win the election. The six-way Republican race features three moderates with extensive legislative experience, a man without any sort of political experience, a man with a radically liberal record named Joe Schwarz, and a proven conservative statesman named Tim Walberg.

[...]

Schwarz, a former Michigan legislator and chairman of John McCain's victorious Michigan primary race in 2000, is a fiscal liberal and a social liberal. He has the touted endorsement of the Republican Main Street Partnership, a wealthy coalition of so-called RINOs — Republicans in Name Only — who identify themselves in their mission statement as the "pragmatic center." Even the League of Conservation Voters, left-wing endorser of Clinton, Gore, and Kerry, has wildly thrown itself behind Schwarz's candidacy.

All in all, Joe Schwarz does not belong in the Republican Party. He is a Democrat at heart, and a socialist at mind. At a recent candidate debate, Schwarz demonstrated that he is thoroughly pro-abortion, warmly in favor of universal federal health care, and enthusiastic about increased federal spending for higher education.

(Emphasis added.)

Most of that article was Schwarz-bashing, but it was fairly representative of the types of attacks we saw throughout 2004 and 2006. You introduce Joe Schwarz as the chairman of the Michigan campaign of John McCain in 2000, and then you talk about how horribly liberal he is.

To Michigan conservatives and Republicans, the fact that Joe Schwarz ran McCain's Michigan campaign brings back unpleasant memories of the 2000 primary. Then-Governor John Engler promised to deliver Michigan to George W. Bush. Instead, the opposite happened, and McCain won. As the New York Times reported:

Mr. Engler said today's results said ''nothing whatsoever'' about Mr. McCain's ability to attract Democrats. Instead, he argued that Democrats, glimpsing an opportunity after Mr. McCain won in New Hampshire, worked to make mischief in the Michigan primary. Mr. Engler's aides said their evidence of Democratic efforts for Mr. McCain was anecdotal.

[...]

There was evidence in the polls of voters as they left the ballot booth that Mr. Engler's endorsement hurt Mr. Bush as much as it helped him. Of the 15 percent of voters who said that Mr. Engler's endorsement had influenced them a great deal, fully seven in ten voted for Mr. McCain. Of the 15 percent who said Mr. Engler's endorsement had influenced them ''somewhat,'' 65 percent voted for Mr. Bush and 33 percent for Mr. McCain.

[...]

Mr. Engler is extremely popular among Republicans, having served all of the 1990's as governor and most of the 1980's as president of the state senate.

(Emphasis added.)

To many Michigan conservatives, it seemed as if John McCain had conspired with Michigan Democrats to embarrass their governor and their preferred presidential candidate. CNN exit polls showed that 17 percent of voters that day were Democrats, and 82 percent supported McCain. He also beat then-Governor Bush 67 to 26 among independents (35 percent of voters) and lost to Bush 29 to 66 among actual Republicans.

So, the evidence was there that McCain only won because of Democratic and independent mischief-makers. And who could they logically conclude was the architect of that strategy? Why, Michigan campaign chairman Joe Schwarz, of course!

Regardless of the truth to that allegation, it served as a reason to dislike both Schwarz and McCain, two men who were old friends who used (at the time) a similar, moderate rhetoric. And don't forget that McCain endorsed Joe Schwarz in both 2004 and 2006, and to Walberg's supporters, Joe Schwarz was and still is the enemy.

I don't want to spend too much time on this point, but it's worth emphasizing. Tim Walberg and Joe Schwarz each represented a wing of the Republican Party-- two wings that, for whatever reason, can't stand each other. McCain is closely associated with Joe Schwarz, and many of the folks that cheer on Tim Walberg will either never support John McCain or will only do so out of hatred of Barack Obama.

----

Now, let's jump forward to 2008. Senator John McCain is the presumptive nominee for the Republican Party. Given the overall dissatisfaction with the Republican presidential field in this election's primaries, I wasn't surprised to see this in 2007:

RM: Real quick before you have to run, have you made an endorsement in the Presidential Primary? Will you make an endorsement?

CTW [Congressman Tim Walberg]: I have not. I probably will keep my powder dry until we have our nominee. The Republican side, there's much to respect with each of them. There are some who have issues that I would like to see changed but when I compare them to any on the Democrat side, people ought to believe me when I say this, it's not just because I'm a Republican, but their issues are so so different from the positions I take on almost anything I'm very encouraged that when we actually get a candidate on both sides the American people and my district, the 7th District people will make the right decision.

Walberg didn't endorse when it mattered, but

I vaguely remember seeing something about Walberg endorsing McCain, but I can't seem to find an article confirming that. If he did, it was only after McCain had secured the nomination, when he would have been expected to endorse.

But beyond that, can we find any other indication of what the political relationship between Tim Walberg and John McCain might be?

On this website and elsewhere, Tim Walberg's relationship with the Club for Growth has been well-documented. To make a long story short, Walberg received an enormous amount of money from the Club in 2006, and has voted pretty consistently in the interests of the Club. They specialize in purging the Republican Party of moderates and replacing them with, well, people like Tim Walberg.

Here's what John McCain says about the Club for Growth:


And here's what the Club for Growth says about John McCain:

Club for Growth President Pat Toomey said this week that his economically conservative group might sit out the 2008 presidential election and focus on congressional races.

The Club has had an antagonistic relationship over the years with Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), the GOP candidate for president. With the general-election match-up now set, Toomey is confronted with this dilemma.

This stings, and it's not just because the Club for Growth spent millions of dollars during the 2004 election cycle, largely bashing Democrats. The Club is a major Republican group, and is expected to endorse as a matter of courtesy, even if they focus on congressional races anyway. Not endorsing is a significant story about divisions within the Republican Party.

And, of course, Walberg is a favorite of the Club.

But that's just one organization. Are there any other prominent supporters of Tim Walberg who are a little hesitant to support John McCain?

Well, yes.

In 2006, then-candidate Walberg was proud to receive the endorsement of James Dobson. What does Dobson say about John McCain?

I cannot, and will not, vote for Sen. John McCain, as a matter of conscience.

... And that's when he's being nice about it!

So, Walberg's supporters aren't willing to do much for McCain. Is there any evidence that McCain will be willing to do anything for Walberg?

Nope.

John McCain has begun to raise eyebrows in Republican circles for his lack of fundraising help on behalf of his party’s House and Senate campaign committees.

The Arizona senator has yet to send a fundraising appeal for those committees nearly four months after becoming his party’s presumptive nominee, and he skipped out on a major fundraising dinner for them in recent weeks.

Obviously, this isn't a personal snub against Tim Walberg, but if John McCain isn't willing to do down-ticket fundraising, then it bodes badly for endangered Republicans like Tim Walberg. He would ordinarily be counting on the top of the ticket for support, but if the article from the Hill above is any indication, McCain will be focusing all of his attention on saving his own campaign, not someone like Tim Walberg-- especially someone whose supporters have had a history of hostility toward McCain.

In the end, Walberg and McCain will need each other, and if Walberg can cling to the McCain campaign, it might help him a lot. But Walberg's side very obviously hates McCain (or at least doesn't trust him). That doesn't bode well for a productive political relationship.

Labels: 2008 Election, 2008 Speculation, Club for Growth, Fundraising, James Dobson, John McCain, Tim Walberg

Update: Oops. As pointed out in a comment, the decision was already made, a couple of days before I posted this. See, when I see an interesting article, I bookmark it to come back to later. This one (as with many lately) I came back to a couple of weeks later, and failed to check my facts before hand.

Congressman Schwarz was not selected. Still, everything nice I say below still stands, and I wish Schwarz luck in any future pursuits.

----

Don't worry, "Schwarz Watch" doesn't mean I'm planning on starting another blog. However, while not necessarily connected with Congressman Tim Walberg's adventures in Washington (and the need to end them this November), I thought this was worth mentioning. Susan Demas brought us this earlier this month:

President Joe Schwarz?

Could be, if Wayne State University taps him to take the reins from outgoing President Irvin Reid. Schwarz, a former Battle Creek congressman, confirmed today he is a finalist for the top job at Michigan's third-largest university.

A former Senator, WSU School of Medicine graduate and mediator in the ongoing feud between the med school and Detroit Medical Center (DMC), Schwarz is considered by legislators and insiders to be a nontraditional but formidable candidate.

[...]

Given the fact that Wayne State has gone to the Legislature for financial assistance, the university may be in the hunt for an experienced legislator to help, which could give Schwarz a leg up.

"He is the only person in the candidate pool being considered with the breadth of experience to fulfill the job," said Democratic former Sen. John Kelly, also a former WSU regent. "The No. 1 issue for Wayne State with its ever-reliance on government funding . . . is getting a respectful hearing from the Legislature and only Sen. Schwarz can provide that."

But the Democratic WSU Board of Governors reportedly has reservations about Schwarz, who was elected in the Legislature and Congress as a Republican but who is now an independent.

However, Liz Boyd, spokeswoman for Gov. Jennifer Granholm said, "the Governor has always spoken very highly of Sen. Schwarz." Granholm appointed Schwarz to the 2007 Emergency Financial Advisory Panel on the state's budget crisis.

Rep. Paul Condino, D-Southfield, chair of the WSU Warrior Caucus, said Schwarz would be a "tremendous" president.

"Having Dr. Schwarz in any room is helpful," Condino said today. "He has an ability to break down an issue. Both he and I share the sentiment to passionately support Wayne State."

[...]

Schwarz said he was "honored to be considered," describing himself as a "loyal and proud graduate" of the medical school in 1964.

"Higher education was my passion and forte all my years in the Legislature," said Schwarz, the former Senate Appropriations Higher Education Subcommittee Chair and a member of the Department of Defense's blue-ribbon panel on the Walter Reed Army Medical Center. "I have been intimately involved in a multiplicity of activities in Michigan. But higher education was the most important reason for my time in the Legislature for many, many years."

Regardless of the outcome of the search, Schwarz said Wayne State and his other alma mater, the University of Michigan, "will always have my time."

Schwarz also confirmed DMC had asked him to be president of Harper Hospital, but he felt he "wasn't exceptionally qualified to be president of a large urban hospital." The WSU presidency is a much better fit, he said.

(Emphasis added.)

I've mentioned it before, but it's worth repeating that I have an enormous amount of respect for Congressman Schwarz. I never voted for him, as I'm a progressive Democrat and he's a right-leaning moderate Republican-turned-independent, but he's more than qualified for just about any job he would want. More than that he is (or at least comes across as) a genuinely decent person. I started Walberg Watch in part out of disgust for the way Walberg and his friends at the Club for Growth treated an honorable public servant.

Of course, Demas brings politics into the article at the very end. It makes sense, and is also my justification for posting this story here.

Although Democrats don't think Schwarz will run as an independent in the 7th Congressional district this year, some see that as a possibility. If Schwarz were to get the WSU job, a 7th Congressional District run would be taken off the table, which would arguably benefit Democratic challenger Sen. Mark Schauer, D-Battle Creek.

Schwarz was quoted by Tim Skubick as saying he wouldn't run, but I'm sure there's that tiny little piece of him that wants to get back into the race. So, yeah, there is the partisan Democrat piece of me that hopes he gets the Wayne State University job to prevent him from making an independent run and splitting the anti-Walberg vote.

But mostly, I hope he gets the job because he deserves it, and, while I don't know much about these things, I think he'd be good at it.

Goodluck, Congressman Schwarz, regardless of what you choose to do.

Labels: 2008 Speculation, Education, Joe Schwarz, Republican Party

Yesterday was the filing deadline, meaning that the candidates we already knew about-- Tim Walberg (R), Sharon Renier (D), and Mark Schauer (D)-- will be the only major-party candidates in the 7th District. I was so hoping for a GOP primary, but it appears to have been wishful thinking.

Over the next few days, I'd like to spend some time looking at the other races which might have an impact on the congressional race. It's important to remember that this isn't happening in a vacuum, and what other Democrats and Republicans running in our state do will have an impact on the contest which this blog follows. The big one, obviously, is the presidential race, followed by U.S. Senator Carl Levin's reelection bid. I hope to talk about other races, too, from county commissioners to the state Supreme Court, always through the lens of the 7th District.

Tonight, however, I'd like to begin with the Michigan House of Representatives.

The 7th Congressional District includes all or part of eight state House districts. The individuals who represent each district may not themselves live in the 7th District, but their political strength as they run for office has an impact. (Note: the Michigan Senate is not up for reelection this year, nor is the governor.)

Listed below are the state House districts which comprise the 7th Congressional District, and my (brief) take on the 2008 elections in each.

HD052 - Pam Byrnes (D)

Pam Byrnes (D-Chelsea) represents this district, which makes up the majority of Washtenaw County (essentially, everything except Ann Arbor and the far east and south-east portions). Her district, which includes areas not in the 7th, is not solidly Democratic, having been represented for a long time by Gene DeRossett (R-Manchester), who was also a candidate in the GOP primary in 2004.

In 2002, Byrnes defeated David Nacht (one-time 2008 candidate for Congress) in the Democratic primary, only to lose to DeRossett 53 to 47. When DeRossett retired/ran for Congress in 2004, Byrnes was back, winning the seat over Republican Joseph Yekulis 55 to 45. She was reelected in 2006 with about 63 percent of the vote.

So, it's a lean-Democratic area (and growth of Ann Arbor only helps), but 2006 could have been a fluke in a wave election, and 2002 and 2004 were reasonably close. Byrnes is in good shape to be reelected to her third and final term (term limits). In a situation like this, one might expect the Republicans to field a reasonably strong candidate to run, build name recognition, and come back to win in 2010. It's exactly what Byrnes did and what many others have done before.

Unfortunately for the GOP, that's not what they did. Representative Pam Byrnes (D) was the only candidate to file in the 52nd House District. What does this mean? There's now a popular Democrat who is more or less guaranteed reelection this fall. The vast majority of voters will be checking at least one box with a "D," and Byrnes will likely be working hard to convince the voters in her district to check a few more.

In 2006, Sharon Renier only won the Washtenaw County portion of the district 50 percent to 47 percent. In 2008, I'm guessing Byrnes could help us improve that margin.

HD057 - Dudley Spade (D)

The 57th District (my own district) is represented by Dudley Spade (D-Tipton). The district encompasses all of Lenawee County except for Cambridge Township in the north. Now, some history. For 16 years, a man named Tim Walberg (R-Tipton) represented Lenawee County in the state House of Representatives. It was a conservative county, and it fit him quite well and liked reelecting him. Then, in 1996, a popular WLEN radio host named Doug Spade (D-Adrian) challenged Walberg for his seat. Spade didn't win, but he performed surprisingly well.

When Walberg retired in 1998, Doug Spade was back, and won the seat. He was subsequently reelected in 2000 and 2002 by increasing margins-- he got 69.4 percent of the vote in 2002. Spade was a perfect for Lenawee County, representing its interests well while gently nudging it away from the far-right conservatism of Tim Walberg. More than that, Spade connected with the people of his district.

In 2004, Doug was term-limited out and his brother Dudley Spade ran for the same seat. It's a sign of the strength of the Spade brand that he won his first term with about 59 percent over David Abraham (R-Tecumseh) in a year where John Kerry only got 45 percent. In 2006, Spade was supposed to get a strong challenge in Jim Koehn (R-Adrian), and ended up winning about 67 percent.

Going into 2008, Spade's challenger will be Emma Jenkins (R-Adrian), who filed Monday. Jenkins hasn't held elected office since the early 1980s (on a township board), but she's active in the local GOP as a "footsoldier." Still, she lacks the name identification Abraham (a county commissioner) and Koehn (a prominent travel agent) had, and Spade is still pretty popular. Indeed, it's a bad sign for your candidacy when the worst thing you can say about your opponent is:

Jenkins said she is looking forward to carrying the party banner in this year’s election against an opponent whom she also considers a friend.

“He’s just in the wrong party,” Jenkins said.

She is running, Jenkins said, because she believes it is important to work for a Republican majority in the state House. In holding the seat as a Democrat, she said, Spade strengthens Democrats’ efforts in Lansing on such issues as Gov. Jennifer Granholm’s Great Start pre-school programs.

Or, in other words, "I'd vote for you if you were a Republican, and I don't like that you're helping educate children!" The problem is, the people of Lenawee County aren't partisan enough for this to be a motivating factor. They might lead Republican, but they like Dudley Spade. He should win reelection pretty easily.

Depending on how popular Spade is and how good of a relationship he has with the Democratic nominee for Congress, he might have coattails similar to Byrnes. This could be a big deal, especially if Mark Schauer is really polling even with Walberg in Lenawee County. If Walberg can't count on Lenawee County, he's in trouble.

HD058 - Bruce Caswell (R)

Bruce Caswell (R-Pittsford) was first elected in 2002, representing a district spanning Hillsdale and Branch Counties, the two most reliably conservative counties in the 7th District. Caswell was elected and reelected by increasing percentages (66.9, 72.7, and 72.8 percent), but he's term-limited out for 2008.

There are four Republicans hoping to replace him-- Kenneth Kurtz (R-Coldwater), Frank Plodzik (R-Coldwater), Don Shemel (R-Coldwater), and Steve Vear (R-Hillsdale). I'll admit right now, I haven't got the foggiest idea how this primary will turn out, but if it's particularly divisive, it might give the only Democrat running a chance.

Her name is Jean Anne Kennedy-Windsor (D-Reading). I know very little about her, except that she was a candidate for uncommitted delegate at the 7th District convention earlier this year and that she was formerly known as Jean Elinor Perego. Still, I'm hopeful that she can put together a strong campaign and take advantage of Republicans who will be largely ignoring her. The better she can build the Democratic brand, the better her chances in November and the better our chances of ousting Tim Walberg.

HD062 - Mike Nofs (R)

Ah, Mike Nofs (R-Battle Creek). He's the foe of Calhoun County Democrats, winning Mark Schauer's seat when he moved from the House to the Senate. He won three elections (2002, 2004, 2006) with roughly the same share of the vote (53.2, 53.4, and 53.6 percent, respectively) in a district that went to John Kerry by 50.1 percent. But while Nofs might be eying Schauer's Senate seat if Schauer wins, Nofs can't run for reelection in 2008.

This will probably be one of the hardest-fought state House districts in Michigan, with Susan Baldwin (R-Battle Creek) and Gregory Moore (R-Athens) facing Tim Nendorf (D-Battle Creek) and Kate Segal (D-Battle Creek). Being from the opposite end of the district, I don't have a good read of the primary for either party, but I have no doubt that all four are potentially strong candidates. Segal is currently chair of the Calhoun County Commission, and Nendorf is a young law student (23 years old) who has interned with Mark Schauer and Carl Levin.

Regardless of the nominees, there will be a lot of energy put into this race, which will probably drive turnout up. But then, if Schauer is the Democratic nominee, one would hope he doesn't have to worry about turnout in Calhoun County.

HD063 - Lorence Wenke (R)

Although based in Kalamazoo County (and not in the 7th District), Lorence Wenke (R) represents a portion of Calhoun County. He's the Republican who, in 2006, got a little bit of attention by pointing out that the DeVos campaign was "plain dishonest." He's also not up for reelection, after winning in 2002, 2004, and 2006 with 57, 59, and 55 percent, respectively. In 2004, John Kerry got 44 percent of the vote.

Those hoping to replace Wenke are James Bolger (R-Marshall), Jerry Vander Roest (R-Galesburg), and 2006 nominee Phyllis A. Smith (D-Vicksburg). Smith managed 45 percent against Wenke and held him to his smallest margin of victory, impressive against an incumbent. Smith is also the recording secretary for the Kalamazoo County Democratic Party, which (hopefully) indicates some party support.

Like other districts, I don't have a good read of how it might play out. However, we can once again hope for a tough GOP primary that will allow Smith to get her name out and contact voters. It's a winnable district and an open seat, and she should have some name recognition from the 2006 election. With any luck, this will be one more reason for Calhoun County Democrats to turn out in November.

HD064 - Martin Griffin (D)

Now we're into Jackson County, which has been the source of lots of excitement. Martin Griffin (D-Jackson) represents the western portion of the county and the city of Jackson, a district that had been solidly held by former Representative and 2004 congressional candidate Clark Bisbee (R-Jackson). In 2004, Rick Baxter (R-Concord Twp.) beat then-Jackson Mayor Martin Griffin 49.9 to 48.9. For those who have been paying attention, you may remember that Baxter was the state representative who said that the day they raised the minimum wage was "the worst day" of his term.

Griffin came back in 2006 to win the district about 53 percent of the vote. Baxter went on to become Tim Walberg's district director and then to leave unexpectedly, which I've covered before. He's not trying to win back his old seat, though, instead aiming for Jackson County treasurer. Baxter also serves as chairman of the Jackson County Republican Party.

So who is running against Griffin this time? Surely, after narrowly losing the seat, the GOP would recruit a top-tier challenger, right? Apparently not.

Leland Prebble (R-Spring Arbor) is the only candidate to file against Griffin. He's a retiring construction contractor, who, as far as I can find, has no previous political experience. The Citizen Patriot ran an editorial today commenting on this:

The fact that a political unknown is the only candidate Jackson County Republicans could find to run against state Rep. Martin Griffin speaks volumes about the state of local politics.

Republican Leland Prebble faces a steep climb against Griffin, the well-known former Jackson mayor. This is a strange situation when you consider this county's strong Republican heritage.

[...]

But this is not just about term limits. The local Republican Party seems to have weakened in recent years, while Democrats are gaining strength.

There is still a Republican majority on the county Board of Commissioners, and there are some Republicans running in high-profile county races: Rick Baxter for treasurer and Mickey Mortimer for clerk.

Nevertheless, in a county that has always favored Republican candidates, it's fair to question what has happened to the party that was born here more than 150 years ago.

Griffin is popular, well-known, and has a no-name opponent. Without knowing anything more, I'd put him about on the same level as Dudley Spade-- safe, soon-to-be reelected, and in a good position to help turn out voters who probably won't be voting for Tim Walberg.

HD065 - Mike Simpson (D)

This is another Jackson County district, covering essentially everything in the county that Griffin doesn't represent, plus tiny pieces of Lenawee and Eaton counties. This district has been changing representatives a lot lately-- Jerry Kratz (R) beats Sharon Renier (D-Munith) in 2002, then Mickey Mortimer (R) is elected in a 2003, and then Leslie Mortimer (R) is elected in 2004, beating 2002 7th Congressional District candidate Mike Simpson (D-Brooklyn) about 51 to 49. Simpson then returned in 2006 and won the district with about 53 percent.

In 2008, Simpson will be challenged by Ray Snell (R), the Blackman Township supervisor. I don't know anything about him, but he could potentially be a strong candidate. Simpson isn't helped, either, by two primary challengers-- Russell Severance (D), a 77-year-old who recently lost a school board election and tried to recall Simpson (the language wasn't approved), and Steven Godbehere (D), a paramedic. I don't know the details of either candidacy, though apparently Severance really doesn't like Simpson.

This is a district where the state House race might not offer any assistance to the Democratic nominee for the 7th District. The Republican could potentially be a strong opponent, and the eventual Democratic candidate might be weakened by the primary. But the district is Sharon Renier's home turf, and Mark Schauer has represented much of it in the state Senate.

HD071 - Rick Jones (R)

This is the last state House district which falls within the 7th Congressional District's boundaries. Since 2004, it has been represented by Rick Jones (R-Grand Ledge), elected in 2004 with 59 percent of the vote and reelected in 2006 with 58 percent. I don't know much about Jones (Eaton County is far away from me), nor do I know much about his challenger, Mark Eagle (D-Lansing).

Lacking any further knowledge, I'd say that Eagle has the potential to turn this into a top-tier race, but right now I'd say Jones is probably safe. Regardless of whether that's good or bad, it doesn't do anything for my primary goal, which is turning out Democratic-leaning voters for the 7th District race. Even so, Sharon Renier won Eaton County 50 to 48, which should mean there's a lot of potential for further Democratic gains.

----

So where does all of that leave us?

None of this, obviously, has been comprehensive. Instead, it's just been my first impressions as all the Michigan races begin to develop. Right now, I'd say that Democrats in the district are in a great position relative to their Republican counterparts. There are three Democratic incumbents (Byrnes, Spade, and Griffin) that I would say are very safe, and could help tremendously in building the Democratic brand and helping the Democratic nominee for the 7th District. There's one district (62) that will have a lot of activity and excitement anyway, which could help in a lean-Democratic year. Two districts (58 and 63) could potentially turn into hot races for their Democrats, depending on how they organize and how the GOP primaries play out. And two districts (65 and 71) I don't see having a major impact at all.

With all of this, I could be wrong. That said, I feel that right now, Byrnes, Spade, and Griffin are some of the best resources Mark Schauer or Sharon Renier could have for reaching out to local voters in areas where they can (and should) perform well. If those three can take advantage of their non-competitive races and help the 7th District nominee, we could be well on track for defeating Tim Walberg.

Hopefully, I'll have plenty of reason to write about all of these candidates and more as we get closer to November. I know that many of you aren't Democrats, and are here more out of a dislike of Walberg than a support for my party. Even so, I'd encourage you to learn more about some of the candidates I've talked about. We're Democrats, which means we're always eager to hear from you and convince you that we've got the right ideas.

Replacing Congressman Walberg is the primary objective of this blog. However, as the congressional race is connected to the other races going on around it, I don't think there's anything wrong with a little party-building.

Labels: 2008 Election, 2008 Speculation, Democratic Party, Mark Schauer, Republican Party, Rick Baxter, Sharon Renier, Tim Walberg