Winds of change certain to blow in 2010 elections
February 1, 2010

by Joseph P. Tartaro
Executive Editor

In my Hindsight column back in the Oct. 15, 2009 issue of Gun Week, I speculated about whether then recent signs were pointing toward November 2010 congressional elections that might turn out to be as astonishing as the historic 1994 upheaval in Congress.

Back then, I based my column on the Tea Party rallies, the Sept. 12 protest march in Washington, DC, and the comments of other observers who predicted that “something big” was in the works with respect to public attitudes. I also mentioned the late Summer polls which showed large numbers of independent voters who were defecting from their 2008 support for President Obama and the Democrats in Congress.

Just those few months back, the general media reporters and commentators seemed to be missing or ignoring the signs I was reading. But that was then. Today things are different.

In the meanwhile, Democrats lost key gubernatorial races in New Jersey and Virginia, and there has been more wrangling over the health care bill in Congress.

Before we look at some of the current reports and columns that show the Democratic leadership in trouble just 10 months before this year’s elections, it might be smart to recall November 1994.

Most gunowners will always remember the 1994 elections in which they played so important a role in turning over control of Congress from the Democrats, who had been the majority for 40 years, to the Republicans. In that election, it wasn’t just freshmen and problematical incumbents who were turned out of office, but prominent long-term leaders like Tom Foley of Washington state, then Speaker of the House, as well as Jack Brooks, the powerful chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.

Back in October, I wrote:

“If you don’t remember, Clinton does. And Nancy Pelosi, the current Speaker. And Harry Reid, the Senate Majority Leader. And so do many Democrat strategists.”

In just over a year since winning the presidency and solidifying majority control of the House and the Senate, the Democrats are already seeing the pendulum start to swing, even though few will admit it without coining new weaselly explanations.

The New York Times reported that “A sea of protesters filled the west lawn of the Capitol and spilled onto the National Mall on Saturday (Sept. 12) in the largest rally against President Obama since he took office, a culmination of a summer-long season of protests that began with opposition to a health care overhaul and grew into a broader dissatisfaction with government.”


“How many people have to march on Washington before the major news media take notice?” Back in September, Joseph Farah of WorldNetDaily.com wondered, “How many tea parties and town halls does it take for the major news media to recognize the American people are peacefully voicing their concerns and deserve to be heard?”

Apparently, by the end of 2009, the general media had finally gotten the message, and perhaps so have some of the veteran politicians in Washington, because some of them are hanging up their hats—mostly Democrats but some Republicans, too.

Just last issue, we reported in Gun Week that four veteran House Democrats were retiring and that one had changed affiliation to the Republican Party. Now we can report that two veteran senators, both Democrats, are also retiring. These including five-term Connecticut senior Sen. Chris Dodd and North Dakota’s three-term junior Sen. Byron Dorgan. There are variously different reasons for each senators or congressman’s decision not to run, but risk of losing seems to be a thread that runs through several districts and races.

In addition, several other veteran Democrats are seen as facing serious challenges, including Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada—and that was before disclosure of ill-advising, racially-insensitive remarks he made about President Obama were disclosed.

On top of which, The Washington Times reported in mid-December, that the Democrats could lose the Senate seats previously filled by Obama in Illinois and Vice President Joseph Biden in Delaware.

“No one doubts that Obama would have been a re-election shoo-in had he remained in the Senate and that Biden had his seat for the foreseeable future,” The Times noted.

“But in another sign of political winds that appear to be blowing against the Democrats in the 2010 cycle, Republicans and independent political analysts say the chances are at least even that their seats could be taken over by two strong Republican candidates next November, when the GOP is expected to make gains in Congress and in the state governorships,” The Times continued.

Of course, Democrats are not the only political veterans dropping out this year. It was recently announced that Republican Rep. Henry Brown of South Carolina will not seek a sixth term this fall. There may be others.

Going into 2010, Democrats held a 257-158 majority in the House and an effective 60-40 veto-proof majority in the Senate, including the two independents who align themselves with Democrats.

But they face an incumbent-hostile electorate worried about a 10% unemployment rate, weary of wars and angry at politicians of all stripes. Many independents who backed Democrats in 2006 and 2008 have turned away. Republicans, meanwhile, are energized and united in opposing Obama’s policies, according to media reports.

The one thing that heartens Democrats is that voters also don’t think much of the GOP, which is bleeding backers, lacking a leader and facing a conservative revolt.

If the Democrats are trashed by voters this November, it could mean that some pro-gun votes will go out with the wash water. Just trading Democrats for Republicans without regard to their individual positions and records can be dangerous. Being Republican is not synonymous with being pro-gun, and Republicans have frequently done little to help gunowners when they have held the reigns of power.

I suspect gunowners will vote on their rights again this year. Some just don’t want to keep waiting for the other shoe to drop in the White House, or in Congress where senior anti-gun Democrats chair committees.

Still, health care will be important, plus jobs and the mounting national debt with little to show for improving the lot of unemployed Americans.

The Washington Times claims Democratic leaders are girding for a political war over the health care overhaul heading in to this year’s midterm elections, preparing strategies and raising funds to fend off attacks by Republicans eager to capitalize on voter discontent.

Analysts from both parties predict the sweeping impact of the proposed health care changes, which will affect every American, to be the overriding issue, with the strongest and most personal impact in 2010.

National polls show strong opposition to the bills that have passed the House and Senate and now must be reconciled in a conference committee before facing a final vote. Polling data compiled by the Senate Republicans’ campaign committee shows that Democrats are trailing their Republican challengers in every battleground state where opposition is strongest.

In the House, between a dozen and two dozen Democrats who voted for the bill are on their party’s vulnerable list.

All of which suggests that if Democrats don’t lose control of the Senate, they are at least likely to lose their veto-proof majority.

In the House, while Nancy Pelosi might still be Speaker again in January 2010, she is likely to have a smaller, and perhaps more cantankerous majority. Either way, the winds of change are blowing.
Return to Archive Index