I'm sure everyone is getting tired of hearing this, but the transcript of my conversation with Senate Minority Leader Mark Schauer is coming soon. Labor Day weekend and today were busy for me. But soon, I promise! Really!

Last week, the following appeared in Susan Demas' weekly column:

Here in the 7th District, fundraising is a way of life for Walberg, R-Tipton, who used to drum up dough for the Moody Bible Institute. If all else fails, he always has his steadfast sugar daddy, Washington anti-tax lobby Club for Growth.

Democratic state Sen. Mark Schauer is psyched to take him on, vowing to amass $3 million by next year. His chief of staff, Ken Brock, seemed to channel the odiousness of Karl Rove earlier this month, bragging that only Schauer can raise that kind of money, unlike "liberal, Jewish trial lawyer" David Nacht or "lazy" Jim Berryman, for whom Brock twice worked.

(Emphasis added.)

It's that last sentence that caught a lot of people's attention-- particularly, the bit about David Nacht. At best, this was a poor choice of words when describing the state of the race. At worst, it was a borderline anti-Semitic comment, which has absolutely no place in political discourse or in the America of the 21st century.

So which was it? From the sounds of it, it wasn't meant to be quite as "odious" as Demas says:

Brock said today he already had apologized to Nacht, and he has no intentions of resigning his post over the comment.

“The moment I saw it in the paper, I knew I had to call him,” he said. “I knew I was wrong the moment I said those words. I was further saddened they were printed in the paper, and I apologize to anyone else who may have been offended.”

And what about Nacht? He was, after all, the target of the comments.

Nacht said he knows Brock isn’t anti-Semitic. He said he believes Brock was using religion, profession and political orientation in a political analysis, not as a personal attack.

“It’s a tricky thing to talk about a candidate’s religion in an analytical way without being accused of being prejudiced,” Nacht said. “I don’t think my work as a lawyer nor my religion would have been a barrier to my being elected. So I disagree with the substantive aspect of the comment that it was something negative, but I think he was trying to legitimately point out weaknesses in my campaign.”

(Emphasis added.)

And:

In another twist on Tuesday, Nacht said he’s endorsing Schauer in his congressional run against U.S. Rep. Tim Walberg, R-Tipton. Schauer first will have to beat two other Democrats, former state Sen. Jim Berryman of Adrian and organic farmer Sharon Renier of Munith, in the August 2008 primary

None of this has stopped Republicans from making it an issue:
So, let's recap. Mark Schauer's chief of staff Ken Brock was giving his thoughts on the Democratic primary, and said something stupid. He says that it wasn't meant to be offensive, and apologized to David Nacht and everyone else. David Nacht says he wasn't offended, and has endorsed Brock's boss.

I, personally, think that this district could have elected a trial lawyer, and it could have elected someone with liberal values. And, yes, I think it could have elected someone that was Jewish, too. That said, I can see how some might see that as a potential political liability-- not that there's anything wrong with being Jewish, but this is still a conservative district, where some folks aren't as tolerant as others. I don't think those biases would have been a factor, but I suppose Ken Brock did.

Don't get me wrong, it was still a stupid thing to say. Ken Brock has been working in politics for years, and he should have known better. But he says he didn't mean it in an offensive way, and the guy he was supposedly insulting wasn't offended.

To me, that ends the controversy right there.

Now, it's your turn to tell me why I'm wrong in the comments.

Labels: 2008 Election, David Nacht, Ken Brock, Mark Schauer

This comment was left on Walberg Watch:

david has left a new comment on your post "Questions For Mark Schauer":

This is David Nacht. I am withdrawing from the race because I do not believe I have a realistic likelihood to defeat Sen. Mark Schauer in a Democratic Primary. I cannot in good faith ask for donations to support such a long odds effort.

I want to thank my wife and sons, my parents, my friends, volunteers and staff for the support over the past several months. Over 300 people made generous financial contributions. These will be returned to the donors on a pro-rata basis.

I intend to do whatever I can to assist the Democratic nominee in this race.

I am humbled by the outpuring of support. I have learned a great deal in the past several months. I will continue to be active in civic life, although I look forward to spending more time with my loved ones.

David Nacht

I was looking forward to seeing David in action next year, but he has to do what he feels is best. Thank you, David, for your hard work and enthusiasm in taking the fight to Tim Walberg.

Labels: 2008 Election, David Nacht, Mark Schauer

Since Senator Schauer hasn't announced whether or not he'll run for Congress, I thought I'd post samples of the two most common and most compelling cases for and against a Mark Schauer candidacy that I've heard.

I'll preface this with two statements and explanations of each.

I like Mark Schauer.

Senator Schauer, I think, has been a phenomenal leader in the state Senate, despite being shut out of just about everything by Republican Majority Leader Mike Bishop. Schauer's been reaching out to bloggers like me, campaigned hard for Democrats across the state, and has represented Calhoun County well. Schauer would be a great addition to the race, and he'd run a fantastic campaign.

I like Jim Berryman, David Nacht, and Sharon Renier, too.

The other three announced Democrats are all great candidates, too. They're smart, dedicated people who would be more than willing to work hard to defeat Tim Walberg in 2008, and they'd work hard for our district in Washington (unlike Congressman Walberg, who's more interested in the Club for Growth's agenda). I'm absolutely satisfied with the three candidates we have. I'm undecided for the Democratic primary, but I'd gladly vote for any of them in the general election.

With that out of the way...

Mark Schauer should run for Congress.

From the comments:

Ken said...

Schauer is the complete package as far as I am concerned:
1) Progressive
2) Smart
3) Politically Savvy
4) Willing to stand on principle
5) Established Base -- His Senate District is wholly contained within the Congressional District
6) Proven vote getter -- won three times in a 50/50 House seat, twice in a leaning Repub. Senate Seat.
7) Proven Fundraiser -- raised over $6 million for the Senate Dems last cycle.

We should do everything we can to encourage him to run. Spread the word in the online community, and talk it up in the broader political community. Let Schauer, and the "powers that be" know, that we, in the online community, are ready to help win this and help in a big way.

Mark Schauer should not run for Congress.

From an e-mail I received, which also appeared as a comment on a Battle Creek Enquirer story:

We need to calm down a little about this one.

While it would be great if Senator Schauer ran, it would also be bad for these reasons:

1) Schauer would have to vacate (or spend much less time at) his post as Senate Democratic leader, leaving us rudderless in the Senate when he's needed most.

2) If Senator Schauer were to beat Walberg, that would create a vacancy in his Senate seat. At least temporarily, that gives Republicans a larger majority in the State Senate.

3) Worse, there would have to be a special election for his senatorial seat. The sad truth is that Right to Life and conservative zealots are much more effective about getting their core people to the polls during special elections. Given that he holds a Republican seat, it is more than likely that a Republican will regain that seat in the special election. Since it would be less than half a term (4 years) until the next election – 2010 – that Republican could run for reelection in 2010 and 2014. You would have Republican control of the seat for almost 10 years!

I say this not to take a shot at Schauer. But we need to slow down a second before the "Run Mark Run" hysteria takes control of our reason. There are two impressive candidates in the field already.

Now, I don't make the claim that either of these are necessarily the complete arguments for each position, and neither comment on his merits as a candidate for Congress. Rather, this seems to be representative of reasons why he should or should not run for Congress.

There's a poll on the Enquirer's website, if you'd like to voice your opinion to a larger audience.

Labels: 2008 Election, 2008 Speculation, David Nacht, Democratic Party, Jim Berryman, Mark Schauer, Sharon Renier, Tim Walberg

The good part about primaries is that it creates stronger candidates. It gives the eventual nominee a chance to practice and refine his or her campaign skills before taking on the other party, and it raises the profile of others in the party who deserve attention. Primaries are good.

Primary fights, however, can get out of hand. When candidates lose their focus and start attacking one another over petty things, it makes everyone look foolish. They should discuss issues, and they should discuss their records and experience. But at the end of the day, they need to remember that any one of them would be better than the guy that's there right now.

Will we see a negative Democratic primary in the 7th District? While I doubt that it'll be as bad as the Republican primary in 2006, we're not off to a good start.

Berryman said his focus is solely Walberg, an unabashed conservative who Berryman says does not represent the majority of voters in the district. But when asked about radio commercials for Nacht's legal firm that began playing across the district a few months ago, Berryman didn't hesitate to question their integrity.

The commercials, and corresponding billboards, include patriotic slogans and Nacht's fight to save jobs as an attorney.

"It just seems real funny that they're being played here in Lenawee County,'' the former Adrian mayor noted. "Is it illegal, probably not, but does it skirt campaign finance laws? People can look ... and say that it does.''

The accusation prompted a seething response.

"Berryman's claims are patently false and it's sad he's had to resort to negative attacks, but I understand considering his mediocre fundraising report,'' said Chris DeWitt, spokesman for Nacht's campaign. "You would've though that someone who ran for Congress before and lost could raise more money, but instead he's at a three-to-one disadvantage.''

DeWitt said Nacht has offices in Battle Creek, Okemos, Farmington Hills and Ann Arbor, and that the advertising has led to several referrals for cases in and outside the district.

Munith farmer Sharon Renier, who beat multiple opponents for the Democratic nomination in the past two elections and intends to run again, said she's happy to have prospective opponents competing over dollars.

"So they're raising and spending money, good for them,'' she said. "I'm not wasting my time because (voters) won't care about what money was raised and from whom. They're gonna want someone who they know won't be bought off or is in it for the glory.''

And so it begins...

For the record, I really do like all three of them, and I think any of them can defeat Walberg in 2008. But this has me worried.

Let's try to keep things civil. As with all things, the way in which you say something matters just as much as what you say.

Anyone up for following the rule "If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all"?

Labels: David Nacht, Democratic Party, Fundraising, Jim Berryman, Sharon Renier

The "More Fundraising" post was getting ridiculously long with my updates on Nacht's and Berryman's filings, so I've broken the updates off into separate posts.

Here's the detailed summary page for David Nacht:

I. RECEIPTS
11. Contributions (other than loans) From:
(a) Individuals/Persons Other than Political Committees
(i) Itemized	160642.04
(ii) Unitemized	0.00
(iii) Total Of Contributions From Individuals	160642.04	160642.04	0.00
(b) Political Party Commitees	0.00	0.00	0.00
(c) Other Political Committees (such as PACS)	0.00	0.00	0.00
(d) The Candidate	0.00	0.00	0.00
(e) Total Contributions (11(a)(iii) + (b) + (c))	160642.04	160642.04	0.00
12. Transfers From Other Authorized Committees	0.00	0.00	0.00
13. Loans
(a) Made Or Guaranteed By The Candidate	0.00	0.00	0.00
(b) All Other Loans	0.00	0.00	0.00
(c) Total Loans ((a) + (b))	0.00	0.00	0.00
14. Offsets to Operating Expenditures (Refunds, Rebates, etc)	0.00	0.00	0.00
15. Other Receipts	0.00	0.00	0.00
16. Total Receipts (11(e) + 12 + 13(c) + 14 + 15)	160642.04	160642.04	0.00
II. DISBURSEMENTS
17. Operating Expenditures	31276.05	31290.45	0.00
18. Transfers to Other Authorized Committees	0.00	0.00	0.00
19. Loan Repayments:
(a) Of Loans Made or Guaranteed by the Candidate	0.00	0.00	0.00
(b) Of All Other Loans	0.00	0.00	0.00
(c) Total Loan Repayments ((a) + (b))	0.00	0.00	0.00
20. Refunds of Contributions To:
(a) Individuals/Persons Other Than Political Committees	0.00	0.00	0.00
(b) Political Party Committees	0.00	0.00	0.00
(c) Other Political Committees (such as PACs)	0.00	0.00	0.00
(d) Total Contribution Refunds (28(a) + (b) + (c))	0.00	0.00	0.00
21. Other Disbursements	0.00	0.00	0.00
22. Total Disbursements (17 + 18 + 19(c) + 20(d) + 21)	31276.05	31290.45	0.00
III. CASH SUMMARY
23. Cash On Hand At Beginning Of Reporting Period	0.00
24. Total Receipts This Period (line 16)	160642.04	160642.04	0.00
25. Subtotal (23 + 24)	160642.04
26. Total Disbursements This Period (line 22)	31276.05	31290.45	0.00
27. Cash On Hand At Close Of The Reporting Period (25 - 26)	129365.99

The full filing is available in PDF format here, but it's 144 pages long, so it'll take me a day or two to digest it. But one quick observation from the summary page: Nacht received all $160,642 from individual contributions, meaning there was no PAC money and no loans made by the candidate himself. In contrast, Tim Walberg's first quarter was one-third individuals (~$45,000) and two-thirds PACs and other committees (~$90,000).

For a list of Nacht's individual contributors, click here.

Labels: 2008 Election, David Nacht, Fundraising

From the Battle Creek Enquirer:

According to Matt Lahr, Walberg's spokesman, the freshman congressman will
be releasing his second-quarter fundraising information before the Federal
Election Commission deadline Sunday. Walberg raised about $135,000 in the first
quarter.

Other Democrats challenging Walberg in 2008 are former state Sen. Jim
Berryman of Adrian and Munith farmer Sharon Renier.

Berryman said he began fundraising about five weeks ago and has collected
about $55,000.

Renier did not return phone calls Monday from the Enquirer

(Emphasis added.)

Although Berryman's $55,000 is less than my expectations post called for, it's still impressive after a decade of low-budget campaigns. (Interesting fact: the last time a Democratic candidate raised more than about $60,000 for a campaign in the 7th District was 1998-- 10 years ago-- when Jim Berryman challenged Congressman Nick Smith.) Also, if Berryman has only been fundraising for five weeks-- very roughly one-third of the time since March 26, when David Nacht announced-- then he's in good shape to match Nacht in the next quarter.

That said, David Nacht definitely has the money advantage at this point. He's got $130,000 cash-on-hand, which is a nice little sum to be sitting on-- and building-- as we move closer to 2008.

The key for both Berryman and Nacht is to spend their money very wisely and frugally. This point in the election cycle is about making all the right contacts with Democrats in the district and raising money for use later. They really shouldn't be spending any large sums of money until this time next year.

And for the fans of Sharon Renier, there's still plenty of time for her to mount a strong campaign.

Of course, none of this will matter in a year, and July of 2008 will be a completely different setting. The real lesson to be learned right now is this: Michigan's 7th District will have at least two strong, credible Democratic candidates that can raise plenty of money.

DCCC, are you excited yet?

UPDATE III: Updates I and II have been removed and are now separate posts, here and here. This was getting long, so I thought I'd make it easier on all of you.

Labels: 2008 Election, David Nacht, Fundraising, Jim Berryman, Sharon Renier, Tim Walberg

The Battle Creek Enquirer has the story on David Nacht's second quarter fundraising.

The campaign of David Nacht, D-Scio Township, announced today he raised more than $160,000 in the second quarter of 2007, from April to June.

Nacht, an Ann Arbor attorney, is challenging freshman U.S. Rep. Tim Walberg, R-Tipton. Walberg's second-quarter fundraising was not immediately known. He raised about $135,000 in the first quarter.

...

The Nacht for Congress Committee was formed March 26. The campaign says it has about $130,000 left in the bank.

“No one can remember a Democratic candidate for Congress in this District ever raising this much at this time in the campaign cycle,” Nacht campaign spokesman Chris De Witt said in a news release today. “David’s fundraising abilities, campaign organization and hard work in the District move him to the top of the list to challenge, and beat, Walberg.”

I'll be interested to see the details in his FEC filing. Walberg, Berryman, and Renier (as well as everyone else in the country) need to file by Sunday, July 15, so we should be learning more soon.

This is great fundraising for Nacht, and more than a little refreshing-- $160,000 is more than all the Democratic candidates from 2002 to 2006 combined.

Also, after seeing that my camera batteries died just as Nacht went by at the Adrian Fourth of July parade, Nacht's campaign manager was kind enough to send me a few photos of the event.

Labels: 2008 Election, David Nacht, Fundraising

In about 5 minutes, June will be over, and the second quarter for political fundraising will be complete. Most eyes will be on the presidential race-- Will Barack Obama outraise Hillary Clinton? How much of his own money will Mitt Romney have spent?

But not me. I'll be eagerly awaiting the filings from candidates in Michigan's 7th Congressional District.

So here's how it's looking:

Tim Walberg: Walberg has to raise plenty of money. He's an incumbent, so it's hard not to, but anything short of a phenomenal second quarter will spark some press speculation and some DCCC and MDP press releases about how weak he is as a candidate. Really, he's got to beat the $148,000 he got last time around, and by a lot. After all, he still wants to scare Joe Schwarz off, right?

The Democrats

Sharon Renier: Unless I missed it somewhere, Sharon Renier hasn't filed with the FEC yet, and doesn't have a campaign apparatus in place for fundraising. So she doesn't need to do anything. But if both Nacht and Berryman post strong numbers, will she still run again? After all, she never broke $60,000 for the entire 2006 cycle.

David Nacht: A prolific commenter named Kyle Sutton has posted this in a few different places:

Without an appropriate heading, I have posted this here and under other stories. I have heard that David Nacht has raised $155,000 this past quarter, making him a very serious contender for the '08 election. This is exactly what the Dems need in a challenger who is going to face Walberg. Walberg has made this race very, very winnable for Democrats, but it will take some financial backing to do so. In raising this money, Nacht has proven himself able to garner the necessary backing. Add that to his impressive resume (working for John Glenn, graduating from U of M and Harvard, unseating a Republican township board, etc.) already featured on the site and you have a very strong candidate.

(Emphasis added.)

Absolutely, yes! If Nacht raised that much-- more than Walberg raised in the first quarter-- it'll put him in a solid place for both the primary and the general election, so long as he keeps it up.

That is, if Kyle is right. If he's wrong, than it's unrealistically raising our expectations, and anything short of that will seem like a disappointment and failure (see: Bill Richardson claiming to outraise John Edwards, and then not). I don't know what kind of connections he has (or if he'd care to elaborate), but this would be a big deal if Nacht raised $155,000.

Jim Berryman: The only way it wouldn't be a big deal for Nacht to raise $155,000 would be if Jim Berryman were to raise even more. I haven't got the foggiest idea where he might be at right now. But here's what he said prior to announcing his candidacy:

Former state Sen. Jim Berryman of Adrian said he has begun talking with supporters to see if he can raise the $2 million to $3 million necessary to challenge the freshman lawmaker.

(Emphasis added.)

With talk like that, a strong second quarter total-- certainly $100,000 or more-- would seem important.

Of course, regardless of what anyone raises, that doesn't mean anything if it doesn't translate into votes. In 2006, both Tim Walberg and Sharon Renier were outraised by other candidates for their respective nominations.

Over the next couple of weeks, FEC filings should become available and I'll post all the data. If any campaigns want to give me a sneak peak at their numbers, feel free.

Labels: David Nacht, Fundraising, Jim Berryman, Sharon Renier, Tim Walberg

There was a nice response to the poll about who you liked to take out Walberg. Now I am wondering about the level of financial commitment the readers of this Blog will make to defeating Walberg.

What best describes your commitment to defeat Tim Walberg
	Will not donate to any campaign
	Will donate only after the primary
	Will donate to Berryman
	Will donate to Nacht
	Will donate to Renier
	Will give but have not decided on a candidate yet
	Have already given to Berryman
	Have already given to Nacht
	Have already given to Renier
Free polls from Pollhost.com

If you want to give to Berryman you can do so through my Act Blue Page.

Labels: $, 2008 Election, David Nacht, Jim Berryman, Poll, Sharon Renier, Tim Walberg

This is just for fun. I have only the three announced Democrats in this race. I know it is early, but make a choice, we won't hold you to it.

Remember to make a comment as to why you voted the way you did.

Who do you like to take on Walberg
	Sharon Renier
	David Nacht
	Jim Berryman
Free polls from Pollhost.com

Labels: David Nacht, Jim Berryman, Poll, Sharon Renier, Tim Walberg

This has been a very long week for me. You know the sort of week where everything good and everything bad happens all at once? Yeah. Walberg Watch hasn't been my top priority the last few days.

But enough of that shameless plea for sympathy. Here's a quick round-up of all the stuff I've wanted to mention, but haven't.

• David Nacht's campaign website has been expanded somewhat, and now includes more issue positions and some photos. It's great to see so much serious action this early in the campaign, and I'm feeling really good about 2008 right now. Some suggestions (for all candidates, not just Nacht): When talking about specific issues, mention specific legislation (ie. Walberg voted against X, I would have voted for it). Also, start a blog. A regularly updated campaign blog would be something I'd love to link to.
• It turns out I'm not really necessary, 'cause some fantastic readers have posted anonymously in the comments about some of Tim Walberg's most recent votes. First, on stem cell research, then human cloning:

Anonymous said...

Once again Walberg votes no on an important issue and is in the minority.

He consistantly votes no. He's an obstructionist and has a very shallow understanding of things.

His information on stem-cell facts he cited is absolutely wrong, but consider his sources.

He had a great opportunity to extol "life-affirming" research and advancements which would also provide great benefits to Michigan research funding, but instead his closedmindedness and tunnel vision on this important issue clouded his judgment and he voted no.

We must elect someone more intelligent and reasonable. We all deserve better.

June 8, 2007 8:46 AM

Anonymous said...

Just to be clear, in voting "no" on this latest bill, Walberg says that he *still* *does not* support stem cell research. His splitting hairs is simply dodging the issue.

I wonder who is feeding him this stuff, as he certainly is not up to it himself.

June 8, 2007 9:01 AM

Anonymous said...

I cannot figure this one out either. Would the "liberal culture of death" that Walberg campaigned against support a ban on human cloning?

Walberg had a chance to make it very clearly a crime to clone humans and he voted against it. It failed 204-213.

His right to life grassroots are going to question that decision. Many of the arguments against embryonic stem cell research hinge on the doomsday scenario of it encouraging human cloning. Why would Walberg take a pass and not outlaw cloning?

June 8, 2007 3:06 PM

• The Michigan Democratic Party is hitting Congressman Walberg hard on oil drilling in the Great Lakes, and rightly so. Here's what they sent out to their e-mail list (also featured in a front-page diary on Michigan Liberal):

The newest controversy surrounding Congressman Tim Walberg is his support for oil drilling in the Great Lakes. This controversy has reached all forms of media: television, radio, newspapers and blogs.

On television: WZZM Channel 13: Idea of Great Lakes oil drilling sparks debate

In the newspaper:

Jackson Citizen Patriot: Walberg drilled over comment

Battlecreek Enquirer: Walberg considers Great Lakes drilling as option

Battlecreek Enquirer: Walberg stops by for town meeting

On the radio: WWJ, The Michigan Talk Radio Network and WILS 1320 AM all provided offline coverage of Walberg’s support for oil drilling in the Great Lakes.

In blogs: Walberg Watch, Swing State Project and many others covered it here, here, here and here.

... And yes, I would still have mentioned that even if they hadn't linked to this blog and my Swing State Project comment.

So that, plus Susan Demas' article and Doug's write-up of the town hall pretty much covers it for Walberg this week. I'm tired, and tomorrow is going to be a very long day. What's new with all of you?

Labels: 110th Congress, David Nacht, Democratic Party, Human Cloning, Issues, Stem Cell Research, Tim Walberg, Walberg Voting Record

I promised my thoughts on former Adrian Mayor and former State Senator Jim Berryman's entry into the race.

First, to preface this: Walberg Watch will not make an endorsement for the 2008 Democratic primary. So far, we have three candidates that have stated their intent. I am satisfied with this field-- all three of them would be an improvement over Congressman Walberg-- but would also welcome the entry of a fourth, fifth, or sixth candidate, provided they brought something new to the field, and were serious about their objective.

This blog will work to help elect the Democratic nominee-- whomever that is. I would, however, welcome all potential candidates (and other public figures not running) to contribute their thoughts. Blogs can become an extraordinary way to share information and ideas, and I think everyone will benefit from that.

Now, as for yesterday's announcement...

As a Lenawee County resident, I've heard about Jim Berryman for years, even though I didn't live in the county while he held public office. He's the Uniserv director for the teachers at my town's schools, most people remember him, and no one that I've talked to has a strong dislike of the man. That's good, and it's something that Tim Walberg doesn't have, even here in Lenawee County.

Berryman offers the resumé that Sharon Renier and David Nacht don't have. A business owner, mayor of a city, member of the Michigan Senate, and active in the community, Berryman is the sort of candidate that looks great. Oddly enough, his record is similar to that of former Congressman Joe Schwarz-- doctor, then mayor of Battle Creek, then the state Senate.

He's got the experience to mount a legitimate challenge, and, without a doubt, he has the connections to put together a good campaign team and a good congressional office. And perhaps most important for modern campaigning, he seems ready to raise the big money-- up to $3 million, he says.

Those are some definite positives right there.

I've taken the time to speak with a few people I know who have met Berryman professionally, and it's been interesting. One, for example, sounded like the president of the Jim Berryman fan club, and had nothing but praise. Another seemed to have had a personality clash with Berryman at some point, and was hoping that he wouldn't be the nominee (but that he was still preferable to Tim Walberg). But for the most part, he comes across with a net positive.

Does that mean he'll be the nominee? Well, no. It means, he has a legitimate shot at becoming the nominee, but he's got to prove himself to the voters first. I wish him luck in that, just as I wish the others luck as well.

But even if he doesn't win the nomination, Berryman's entry into the race is a good thing. It brings a great deal of attention to the Democratic side of the 2008 election, attention which was sadly lacking the previous two election cycles. With that attention and with Berryman's experience, it forces all the candidates to campaign on a higher level than has happened previously, with solid ideas and serious fundraising.

If Berryman raises lots of cash, other candidates will have to get to work in order to be competitive, and that helps in two ways. First, it sets the stage for the general election, where money will be needed to compete with Tim Walberg. Second, it energizes the Democrats in the district. I'm not a fan of nasty primaries, but if Jim Berryman, David Nacht, and Sharon Renier get into an ad war, it'll remind Democrats in the district that they've got a shot at winning.

The right combination of money and energy wins elections. In 2006, Sharon Renier was absolutely motivated to win, but she fell short because she lacked the campaign apparatus to transfer her energy to the general public. In 2008, hopefully this will be different.

Anyway, those are my thoughts.

Labels: 2008 Election, 2008 Speculation, David Nacht, Fundraising, Jim Berryman, Sharon Renier

Ask, and you shall receive...

Anonymous said...

I didn't know anywhere else to put this, but has there been any news about the other candidates in the race? Not much, if anything, has been put on this site about Reneir or Nacht in a while.

May 2, 2007 1:08 PM

... To which I basically said there was nothing new to report. It turns out I was wrong-- David Nacht launched a campaign website, at http://www.nacht4congress.com/.


It's not much yet, but it's a great start, and I look forward to watching all the candidates' internet presence grow. As I've told all of them at some point, it'd be a great idea to start a campaign blog.

Of course, Sharon Renier already has a campaign website, from her 2004 and 2006 bids.

(Thanks to the Daily Telegram for noticing this in their article on Jim Berryman.)

UPDATE [Thursday, May 03, 2007]: The Battle Creek Enquirer noticed this too. But just a quick word to folks at the Enquirer-- if you're going to put on a headline like "Nacht launches Web site, campaign committee to unseat Walberg," it might help to actually mention what the address for the web site is.

Labels: 2008 Speculation, David Nacht, Democratic Party

Yesterday was the Michigan Democratic Party convention in Detroit, where the 7th Congressional District received plenty of love and attention from the state party. The Associated Press (through the Detroit News) brings us this:

Some GOP lawmakers who won their congressional districts faced tougher-than-expected challenges that underscored a tough climate for Republicans nationally. That got the attention of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, which is targeting districts won by GOP Reps. Tim Walberg of Tipton and Joe Knollenberg of Oakland County's Bloomfield Township, Brewer said.

"The Democrats in those two districts demonstrated without any national help that those two districts are winnable," Brewer said.

I couldn't make the convention, nor could any other Walberg Watch contributors, unfortunately. [UPDATE: Apparently, Doug was at the convention. My mistake.] If any readers were there (and attended the 7th District caucus), I'd love to hear your thoughts on how it went.

Perhaps more important, though, is that a new Democratic candidate emerged: David Nacht.

In south-central Michigan's 7th District, potential candidates include state Reps. Mike Simpson and Martin Griffin in Jackson County, former Rep. Doug Spade in Lenawee County and organic farmer Sharon Renier, who lost to Walberg in November.

Though many Democrats attending the convention didn't say whether they're considering a run, one did: David Nacht, an attorney and township trustee outside Ann Arbor, said he will run in the 7th District.

"The district is in play for Democrats," said Nacht, who called himself a moderate Democrat. "I'm someone who will fight for workers' jobs."

This is the first time I've heard his name as a candidate. He's got an impressive biography, from his law firm's website:

David Nacht, the firm founder, holds degrees from Harvard College ('87) and The University of Michigan Law School ('92), where he served as an editor of the Law Review. Prior to attending law school, Mr. Nacht served as a staff member to former U.S. Senator John Glenn on the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee, where he organized committee hearings and assisted the Senator in negotiating the passage of multiple pieces of legislation.

Mr. Nacht started the firm in January 1996 in Ann Arbor, after previously practicing law at Miller, Canfield, Paddock and Stone, P.L.C. - Michigan's largest law firm. Nacht also clerked for a federal district judge, Stewart Newblatt, in the Eastern District of Michigan. Mr. Nacht has published articles on employment law and a book chapter on ethics in government. He often speaks locally on legal and ethical issues, and speaks regularly as a guest lecturer at the University of Michigan Law School. He has served as faculty for the American Bar Association Health Law section and formerly chaired the Washtenaw County Bar Association Employment Law section.

Currently Mr. Nacht serves on the board of the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority, the boards of several non-profit organizations and community groups, and is an elected Scio Township Trustee.

Nacht is a member of the State Bar of Michigan and is admitted to practice before federal district courts in Michigan, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals and the US Supreme Court. He is also member of the American Bar Association, Federal Bar Association, American Trial Lawyers Association, Michigan Bar Association, and the National and Michigan Employment Lawyers' Associations. David specializes in Employment Law, Sexual Harassment, ERISA, Commercial Litigation, Education Law, Constitutional Law, and Land Use disputes.

(Emphasis added.)

Nacht was elected as a Scio Township Trustee in 2004 with 4,891 votes-- the second-highest total for the four elected trustees. Fellow Scio Township Trustee Chuck Ream ran for the Democratic nomination in 2006. In 2002, he was a candidate for the Democratic nomination for the Michigan House, 52nd District, losing to Pam Byrnes by less than 1,200 votes. Byrnes lost in the fall of 2002, but won in 2004.

On January 16, 2007, a David Nacht joined the Jackson Democratic Party Meetup group, a group which also includes 2006 candidates Sharon Renier, Fred Strack, and Daryl Campbell. He has done work with the ACLU and Planned Parenthood in the past, and the FindLaw lawyer directory lists Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, and Labor Law among his areas of practice.

That, plus his history of campaign contributions, is what 15 minutes of Google searches could find. He looks like a good person and could be a strong candidate. If you know more about him, please feel free to share in the comments.

UPDATE: The Battle Creek Enquirer now has an article about David Nacht up. Also, thanks to everyone in the comments and especially those of you that contacted me via e-mail with your thoughts on his candidacy.

Labels: 2008 Speculation, David Nacht, Democratic Party