NY-26: Lee Is 33rd Richest Member Of Congress

There's never going to be a better time to hit Lee. (0.00 / 0)

It's as simple as that. I wouldn't be surprised if there are only superficial changes to the district map in WNY after 2010: say, trading the rest of Robert's native Orleans County for a different chunk of Louise Slaughter's district. It's going to be damn hard to significantly change the map without flipping one of the surrounding districts, particularly Eric Massa's.

That said, even if the district gains more Democratic voters for 2012, there is NEVER going to be a better time to challenge Lee. He's relatively low profile, his popularity is mixed, and people don't have the warm fuzzy feelings about him they have for long term congressmen. If we don't get rid of him now, Lee could end up roosting in Congress for decades.  

---

by: Adama D. Brown @ Wed Sep 16, 2009 at 19:01:49 PM UTC

Totally agree - his predecessor (Reynolds (0.00 / 0)

I believe) had seniority on his side, but Lee is a one termer.  His loss would balance out the possible/probable loss to a Republican in McHugh's district.

Also, the Republicans have designated Lee's seat as a "must hold" and is giving him tons of money.

A spirited and tough campaign in NY-26 - even if we lose -will siphon money away from other contested districts. (Unless Lee wants to use his own money...)

Useful to have your comments re: Lee's ignorance about farm issues when Democrats are assembling talking points for voters in farm areas.

Plus, having a Dem in NY26 means less gerrymandering.

And, Western New York is a great place to visit in summer.

HylasBrook

---

by: HylasBrook @ Wed Sep 16, 2009 at 19:21:20 PM UTC

You know my opinion (4.00 / 1)

26 is the wealthiest district with no NYC commuters (21-29) at $65,993 as the average Household income.

The district is heavily republican.

A millionaire running against a criminal lost twice.

Reynolds was an 11 on the 1-10 Republican scale, Chris Lee is about a 7.5-8.

Lee beat a decent candidate by a margin that indicated that Lee won the majority of independent voters.

Since then, Lee has done not one thing that's offensive or criminal. The one vote that could really be used against Republicans, SCHIP, he voted for.

This race needs an absolute minimum of 2-3 million dollars to run competitively. Reynolds spent $7-9 million in 2006 between his candidate committee and the NRCC. That's a lot of money. Who can possibly raise that?

The pendulum is a-swingin. There's no Bush to point to. We're going to lose seats in 2010 unless we work our asses off to protect them. Seats that we barely won in 2008 are in danger. Seats that we barely lost are further out of reach. This was neither - this was a seat that we lost badly. What's changed?

Rather than spending that money on a fools errand in 26, we need that money to defend Massa and Arcuri and Maffei and Murphy. $2-3 million buys them a lot of extra TV ads.

I'd rather lose one seat we don't have and hold four than lose five.  

---

by: Amherst Guy @ Wed Sep 16, 2009 at 20:57:11 PM UTC

Okay, I need to correct you on a whole bunch of things. (0.00 / 0)

"26 is the wealthiest district with no NYC commuters (21-29) at $65,993 as the average Household income."

The median income for NY-26 is $46,653.

"The district is heavily republican."

And growing less so every day.

"A millionaire running against a criminal lost twice."

A millionaire who was personally unlikeable and refused to seriously campaign outside of urban areas lost to a heavily entrenched and very senior congressman who, besides never being convicted of anything, brought home a lot of pork.

"Lee beat a decent candidate by a margin that indicated that Lee won the majority of independent voters."

Lee beat an absolutely TERRIBLE candidate. Let's be blunt: Alice Kryzan was a bad congressional candidate for this district, and she still would have been a bad candidate even if we'd had the 18 months to work with her that we had with Powers. Even so, Lee only won 55-45 when you include the WFP vote. Reynolds won reelection in 2002 by 70 to 30.

"Since then, Lee has done not one thing that's offensive or criminal. The one vote that could really be used against Republicans, SCHIP, he voted for."

One vote? Just one? He opposed the economic recovery plan, he opposes healthcare reform, voted against Lilly Ledbetter, voted against stopping climate change, supported a return to the Bush energy plan of big oil subsidies and $4 a gallon gas... I could go on like that for awhile.

"This race needs an absolute minimum of 2-3 million dollars to run competitively. Reynolds spent $7-9 million in 2006 between his candidate committee and the NRCC. That's a lot of money. Who can possibly raise that?"

Rob Miller just raised $1 million dollars in 48 hours because the people decided they wanted the other guy out. And remember Reynolds was the head of the NRCC, as well as having both the connections and the power to actually be a player. Lee has neither. As yet, Lee has only raised $312,000, and I'm not even sure if he's paid back the $250K he loaned out of his personal fortune.

Seriously AG, I don't think that anybody has been paying closer attention to this guy than I have, and there's one thing that both he and I know for damn sure: he's vulnerable.  

---

by: Adama D. Brown @ Wed Sep 16, 2009 at 21:59:31 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Since you two... (0.00 / 0)

Are dueling with facts absent any proof, here are the numbers for you.

This comes straight from the American Community Survey covering the 26th congressional district.

Median household income: $53,102
Median family income: $65,994
Per capita income: $25,508

You both make some good points, but both your arguments are flawed. Amherst Guy, you know where I stand as well. Your arguments always revolve around the money. Do you need a couple million dollars? Probably. More wouldn't be bad. But it's not how much money you have, but what you do with it. If you waste it away on unnecessary staff and wasteful campaign materials, then you might as well kiss the campaign goodbye. But if you spend wisely, you can put together a strong operation that will be tough to beat no matter how much money the other guy has.

Adama, the Rob Miller example is a poor one. Yes, he raised tons of dough. But his opponent did the same. Wilson was able to raise money because, just like us, the conservatives rallied around him.

Also, Lee's vulnerability is debatable. We aren't dealing with a weakened incumbent. Is he a weak representative? Yes. I see that. I know you see that too. But beyond that, there's really nothing that makes him very vulnerable. The only thing that makes him vulnerable is his that he is in his first term. The Republicans will rally around him and be a strong candidate in 2010. We have plenty to throw at him, but we also have to put forth a good candidate who can contend.

---

by: robert.harding @ Wed Sep 16, 2009 at 22:55:57 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

My point is, the money is there to be raised if people want the seat. (0.00 / 0)

Yes, Miller is obviously a special case. But the principle of small unit fundraising remains the same, and the fact is that bringing in a lot of money, in the millions, to a hotly contested congressional race isn't at all unreasonable if people are interested.

As for vulnerability, Lee is doing a lot of things that his predecessor never would have, such as touring the rural parts of the county trying to sell people on his policies and attitudes. For being a "safe" Republican seat, Lee has started to run for reelection awfully early. I'm not contending that it's not an uphill race, but they always are.  

---

by: Adama D. Brown @ Wed Sep 16, 2009 at 23:35:10 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Of course the money is there... (0.00 / 0)

Yes, Miller is obviously a special case. But the principle of small unit fundraising remains the same, and the fact is that bringing in a lot of money, in the millions, to a hotly contested congressional race isn't at all unreasonable if people are interested.

ActBlue is a wonderful thing. Of course, part of the Democratic primary last year was criticism from Jack Davis about Powers accepting funds from outside the district. That was a joke, since a lot of candidates get money from outside the district. That is where you can raise plenty of money from all over.

As for vulnerability, Lee is doing a lot of things that his predecessor never would have, such as touring the rural parts of the county trying to sell people on his policies and attitudes. For being a "safe" Republican seat, Lee has started to run for reelection awfully early. I'm not contending that it's not an uphill race, but they always are.

It's a safe Republican seat right now because we don't have a candidate. And I don't see it as running for re-election. He clearly has a different style than Reynolds. He is out and about doing what representatives do (normal ones anyway). It is no different than what Massa is doing or other representatives in New York. It sure doesn't hurt re-election efforts when you do it, but it also helps make you look like a credible representative and someone who cares. That is something Reynolds didn't have on his side.

---

by: robert.harding @ Thu Sep 17, 2009 at 00:57:18 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

well (0.00 / 0)

Do you need a couple million dollars? Probably. More wouldn't be bad. But it's not how much money you have, but what you do with it. If you waste it away on unnecessary staff and wasteful campaign materials, then you might as well kiss the campaign goodbye. But if you spend wisely, you can put together a strong operation that will be tough to beat no matter how much money the other guy has.

I agree with all of this. But you still need 2-3 million to play ball. I'd rather put up some schlep who can take a fall, and spend that money elsewhere. This is my home district too, but I'm just trying to be pragmatic.

---

by: Amherst Guy @ Wed Sep 16, 2009 at 23:51:45 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I can only talk about my experience in NY-20 (4.00 / 2)

but we got a total newcomer into Gillibrand's seat against a well known state assemblyman.

The tide is turning - we need a GOOD candidate, and Lee's voting record pits him against just about everyone in the district, given that upstate NY has been in an economic depression for a decade and a half.

NY-20's candidate was able to talk about being a small businessman and how his companies were able to create jobs. The same can be done in western NY.

Plus there are Kossaks from safe districts that can ba called upon to donate money and time.

The tide is in our favor, so let's not quit before we start.

HylasBrook

---

by: HylasBrook @ Wed Sep 16, 2009 at 23:00:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Agreed... (0.00 / 0)

I know that I am supportive of a Scott Murphy-type candidate. Someone without experience as an elected official but is politically savvy. That's the type of candidate the Republicans went with. We wouldn't be hurt if we did the same.

I don't believe we would be putting four seats in jeopardy for the sake of one. That's my point. I don't see it as being a gamble by challenging Lee. The candidate that runs against Lee would have to stand on his or her own two feet. He or she may or may not get help from the DCCC. So they would need to run a strong campaign (not only to get support, but support from the DCCC).

Whatever happened to running a grassroots campaign? Is that not what we did in 2008 to win so many races? I guess we are already forgetting the lessons of 2008. Money is key, but it's not everything.

---

by: robert.harding @ Thu Sep 17, 2009 at 00:48:58 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Grassroots resources (0.00 / 0)

Are limited too Robert, in fact, they are far more limited than money - there's always more money if your willing to work for it, but there's never more time waiting around the corner.

I'd rather spend those resources on the State Senate.

---

by: Amherst Guy @ Thu Sep 17, 2009 at 03:37:30 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

my point (0.00 / 0)

is resources are limited.

Rather than re-refute you point by point, I'll try to clarify my position.

At the beginning of the recession Proctor and Gamble found themselves with limited resources. Jif and Folgers were the weakest things in their portfolio, so they sold the both of them to Smuckers. They felt they had a better future with Swiffers and Pringles and Tide.

Same with Ford dumping Land Rover and Jaguar, same with Nike selling Starter, same with The Limited Company selling The Limited, because they didn't have the money to pay for everything, and they saw a better future with their Victoria's Secret brand then with the brand that their entire company was named for.

It's no different. We don't have the money to pay for everything. My point isn't that we could never beat Lee; with a perfect candidate and millions and millions and millions of dollars and a slip-up or 17 by Lee, we could. Maybe. My point is that we only have so much money, and beating Lee is the weakest thing I see in our portfolio. The best pickup opportunity in NY remains Peter King's seat due solely to his craziness, and the money is better spent on defense anyways.

Hell, for that matter, SS-61 is almost fully contained in NY-26. By next election day, my projections estimate that there will be 200-500 more Democrats than Republicans in the district. If you're so intent on plying offense in Rural WNY, that's where the money is best spent - Ranzenhofer has every weakness you pinned on Lee, plus the State Senate needs 1 more Democrat - especially in a redistricting election - way worse than Congress does.

As to Rob Miller, the same thing happened in Minnesota last year with Bachmann's opponent. That worked out well.

---

by: Amherst Guy @ Wed Sep 16, 2009 at 23:47:50 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Lee's Personal Wealth Is Irrelevant (4.00 / 1)

It's one thing to argue that Lee doesn't represent his district. It's another to argue that his wealth is somehow relevant. So I don't really get much of this post, especially the title.

FDR came from a wealthy family, and almost no one in American history has done more for those in need. Could he "relate" on a personal level to those he helped? I don't know, and I really don't care. All I would care about are his policies, and not whether he is "one of us." (One could say the same thing about the Kennedys.)

If people want to argue that Lee is vulnerable and that Democrats should mount a strong challenge now, that's fine. But I don't see the wealth issue as relevant to representation. There are wealthy liberals and wealthy conservatives. There are middle class Democrats and middle class Republicans. There are poor people who support Obama and poor people who oppose him. Talking about Lee's wealth doesn't really add anything to the discussion (aside from his ability to help fund his own campaign), or his job performance.

---

by: dsimon @ Thu Sep 17, 2009 at 03:43:39 AM UTC