Friday, 31 December 2004

Charity & Media Attention

As the enormity of the devastation caused by the great slosh of the Indian Ocean unfolds, the world looks on in horror, while many respond with their pocketbooks or their service to the impacted shorelines. This story IS getting the attention it deserves, displacing the inanities that usually get top billing on the local TV news. I still remember the last such enormous tragedy, the 1991 typhoon in Bangladesh, which must have received much less attention, as I've been surprised by how few remember it today. Though the death toll of 138,000 was comparable, the devastation was confined primarily to Bangladesh, which likely contributed to its having received less attention.

Recognizing that tragedies need a response regardless of how much media attention they receive, for my own donation to Mercy Corps I chose the "Where Most Needed" category, allowing the organization to funnel the money to Sudan, for instance, if the overwhelming response to the tsunami has left it or other tsunami-unrelated efforts underfunded.

Journalist Mathew Maavak, near the scene of the tragedy in Southern India, gives a mixture of on scene reporting and insightful reflections in its aftermath. His home page also accidentally pointed me to the writing of David Brin, who another friend coincidentally had just been telling me about in the previous week. But that's fodder for another post.

Monday, 27 December 2004

America's Theological Complexion

With the election behind us, I've wondered what direction to take this web log. While the election was a prime motivator in pushing me to start it, I have no wish to abandon the effort, though quiet periods will likely punctuate it, as other foci intervene.

No it will not become primarily a theological blog, but theology is clearly an area of interest, and one which contributes strongly to the political debate which continues in America. A recent article by Tim Appelo in the Seattle Weekly caused me investigate further the religious, and in particular the Christian, challenges to the doctrines of the religious right which have garnered such attention lately. I bought Bruce Bawer's Stealing Jesus; How Fundamentalism Betrays Christianity, and have almost finished it. While it can serve as an excellent primer on the most radical elements of the fundamentist, evangelical, and charismatic movements in today's American culture, it falls short of examining in detail (at least so far) those portions of the conservative Christian movement which still buttress the main parts of conservative evangelicalism while distancing themselves from the most simplistic, doctinaire, or hate-laced portions of the movement.

A visiting relative brought into my home a book from that very perspective, Total Truth by Nancy Pearcey. Thumbing through its pages, I quickly became skeptical of its scholarship, as the Apologetics therein, defend Intelligent Design as the truthful alternative to a Darwinistic worldview of the emergence of life. Intelligent Design is generally thought of by liberals and those who revere church/state separation as a buzzword created to mask "Creationism" in fancier clothing to give it greater legitimacy in the public classroom of the future. The ACLU is currently involved in a case challenging its introduction in a public school in Pennsylvania.

Unlike 6-day creation literalists though, Pearcey accepts what she differentiates as micro-evolutionary principles, and writes with considerable force and intellect, though I have yet to read even close to all of the 400-page tome. While I doubt she will convince me that macro-evolution is less likely than the theory which she proffers, I've decided to give it a read and decide if the ACLU would do better spending its energy elsewhere. The book deals with other general cultural considerations, and is subtitled "Liberating Christianity from Its Cultural Captivity". Pearcey is largely informed by the theology of Francis Schaeffer whose L'Abri Fellowship in Switzerland she visited in her youth.

What troubles me most about Apologetics is that it is shamelessly referred to as the intellectual backing for the more extreme forms of fundamentalism, which Bawer and others such as John Shelby Spong correctly note distort the teachings of Jesus into something legalistic and hateful. I am speculating that Pearcey and others who advance Apologetics realize that their theories need the backing of the religious right establishment, and refrain from highlighting their differences with these natural allies in order to avoid alienating them. References to her book on the Web are almost uniformly supportive and associated with right leaning sites, this critique being the sole exception which I found. The absence of reference to it by liberal theologians may be in large measure simply due to the newness of the book. I wonder, though, if there is not a strategic element in liberals' avoiding analysis of more intelligent writing from Christian conservatives, as it is much easier to dismiss the excesses of Pat Robertson, Ralph Reed, Jerry Falwell and the like, and then dismiss others such as Pearcey, simply by association.

Given the huge proportion of the population of America which identifies itself as Christian, it strikes me that greater public conversation about the faith and its many faces is sorely needed, perhaps a rare point on which Pearcey and Bawer could agree. As important as the separation of church and state is to the running of the government, we lose much if we translate that principle into keeping matters of faith entirely private. To do so is to grant the religious right the title of the standard bearers of Christianity, which is the danger Bawer so urgently seeks to avert.

Having delved into this area at all, has reminded me of the extraordinary theological diversity within Christendom, just as having examined the foregoing election exposed the extraordinary political diversity in America. And yet in both politics and Christianity a deep bifurcation has developed which results in unfortunately simplistic analysis of what the "two" sides believe, when in fact the question is so multi-faceted.

Friday, 3 December 2004

Tragedy and Tears

When a personal tragedy befell someone in my wider circle of friends eleven days ago, blogging was but one activity which was interrupted for me. Tears were more effective than words, and public comment felt inappropriate. I'll be back, but now I do have other things to catch up on, so will likely be scarce through the end of the year.

Friday, 19 November 2004


Can you say disproportionate? Thanks to NPR for this story.
Hemnauth Mohabir ... in the spring of 2002, returned to Guyana to visit his mother, who was ill. On his way back to New York that April, an immigration agent at Kennedy International Airport noticed Mohabir had a criminal record: Six years earlier, he'd been convicted of possessing about $5 worth of drugs. The judge fined him $250 for a misdemeanor and let him go.

Because of that past conviction, Mohabir was deported to Guyana and banned from ever coming back to the United States. But before returning to his native country, Mohabir was detained for almost two years at New Jersey's Passaic County Jail, where he alleges that guards taunted and beat detainees and terrorized them with dogs.
So how does Gonzales replacing Ashcroft help us?
Read Mohabir's own story in the Detainee Newsletter.


My fave so far from

Friday, 12 November 2004

Letter from Dennis Kucinich

Thirteen months ago Dennis Kucinich spoke on my island, and fired me up about what might yet be possible in American politics. Sure I realized that if a vegan who talked about forming the "Department of Peace" ended up being the standard bearer for the Democrats there would be many who would try to make him into a laughingstock, and probably successfully. But in person he had intellect, appeal, and integrity that demanded my support. So launched my political year. Thank you Dennis!

His email letter mass mailed to all of us on his list stands as one of the nicer post election commentaries I've read. He will probably never be electable to national office, but those who dismiss him as a simple ideologue have only watched him reduced to brief sound bites in debates or clips from stump speeches. Here's his letter:

Hi everyone, Dennis here. Welcome to part of my library. I've been doing a lot of reading and thinking in these past 24 hours since we have seen the outcome of the election - so different than what we had hoped for.

I have to admit, myself, to being surprised that John Kerry lost the election. I did everything I could to try to make it possible for America to take a new direction - even to the point of beginning my own presidential candidacy almost two years ago.

All of us in the Kucinich campaign poured ourselves into John Kerry's campaign so that America could make a new beginning - and I've heard from so many of you around the country expressing great concern about this outcome, and asking, "Where do we go from here?"

This is a critical moment, where everything we believe in is being tested, and everything we stand for and hope for remains on the line. George Bush will have another four years in the White House. We can predict the direction he'll take this country and the world.

But what we also need to be able to predict is what we shall do. What our intention is for this country, the world, the role that we hope to play. Because, certainly, the feelings of anger and even depression which abound in so many of the circles that so many of us move in - despite that anger and depression we have to see things as they are and move beyond this moment to create some new possibilities in America.

Because, while George Bush is certainly going to have a lot to say about what happens in the next four years, he's not the only one.

You, I and those with whom we've worked over the last few years have the opportunity to participate in creating a whole new dialog in America and the world. We may not have the kind of momentum we had hoped for, which we hoped a Kerry victory would bring, but we do have our own courage - and our own quality of heart - which will hold us in good stead in what will surely be some very challenging times ahead.

I think we need to go through this period of grieving over the election, and then we have to get ready to bring some closure and move on, and go to a place of real action again, of real heart-centered action, of willingness to take on the challenges which this administration is bringing to our nation and the world.

We need to rededicate ourselves to working for peace. Not just further empowering the anti-war movement, but to look at peace as a creative endeavor, where we bring ourselves into working for peace in our relationships, in our communities.

The Department of Peace becomes ever more imperative. And the eleven states whose Democratic delegations took a strong stand in favor of a Department of Peace will be focal points of all our efforts to get congressional delegations to begin to sign on in support of this concept, which is aimed at making non-violence an organizing principle in our society. If there was ever a time when we needed that approach, it's now.

On health care: in many states across this country, new iniatives are being aimed at the state level to help develop a kind of a universal health care approach within a state. People in Oregon tried it a few years ago and I think they're going to come back. There's a burgeoning effort in the state of Ohio. We need to look and see what we can do to promote health care in this country, and to get people organized around it.

The environment: we know this administration is not going to be good for the environment - but we also know that we have the opportunity to push forward, at every level, development of alternative energies.

You know, we're looking at soaring natural gas prices in the next few months. This gives us some leverage to get popular support for an effort to develop energy alternatives. (As if we didn't need that - get that - with the higher gas prices.) But we know with the oil companies having a resurgence in political power with the re-election of George Bush, it gives us also the ability to galvanize public support for the development of alternative energy.

There'll be so many things that we can talk about in the days ahead. But I just wanted to take a few moments of your time to remind you that, while it would appear that so much was lost on election night, so much remains for us to do. We have to be firm in our resolve. We have to remember the commitments that brought us into this contest. That it wasn't just about John Kerry - it was about us. It was about our hopes, our dreams, our intentions to create a better nation and a better world. Those commitments remain. They help to empower us daily.

So, let's grieve over the loss of this election, but let's come together and realize that it's the unity that we have expressed over these last few years which gives us real power to bring forth creative change. That, even in this moment of seeming political darkness, we can find some light - and that light is within each of us.

This isn't the first time in our nation's history that we've seen bitter divisiveness - it was in 1865 in March that Abraham Lincoln faced a nation that was horribly divided in a civil war with massive casualties. And in his second inaugural address, Lincoln said these words: "With malice toward none, with charity for all." He gave us a lesson that's valid in our times - not to get pulled into the bitterness and the divisiveness - to still be heartfelt in our communications - to at some point separate ourselves from the anger which we all feel and to move past it, to try and connect with each other once again - through the heart.

This campaign, for us, began with an understanding of the world being interconnected and interdependent. It is our connection to all people that causes us to achieve a higher level of compassion.

So let's remember Lincoln's words - and let's remember our own resolve. And let's make sure that when we begin a new chapter in the politics of this nation, we come forward with ever more resolve, ever more courage, ever more heart, ever more of a spiritual approach - that will enable us to be better-prepared to help create this new world that we know is just waiting to be called forward.

So, thank you - thank you for participating in this election. Thank you for your efforts on behalf of John Kerry and thank you for still believing that we can come together through a collective effort to achieve a transformation of our social and political structures.

We must never yield to disappointment and to discouragement, because we build our victories for tomorrow from today's defeats.

So, I look forward to continuing our ongoing discussions. You'll be able to watch a lot of activity at - there are going to be a lot of exciting things happening on this Web site.

I hope to speak with you soon - and if I don't talk to you before Thanksgiving, I hope that you and your families have much to be thankful for in your own lives and loves, notwithstanding this unfortunate result of the election.

Thank you, and thanks to John Kerry, Teresa Heinz Kerry, John Edwards, Elizabeth Edwards and their families for giving this nation an opportunity for hope again, and for showing us a level of decency that reflects well on the potential that all of us have to touch our fellow citizens.

Thanks, and good day.

Thursday, 11 November 2004

My Purple America

Those red and blue maps always make the country look more Republican than it is. For one, rural areas which tend to be more Republican cover more acreage, and for another red and blue ignore both the red sentiment in the blue areas and the blue sentiment in the red areas. Enough already with all the secession talk. Let's paint a more accurate picture instead.

Here we divide by county, then represent each county's size in proportion to its human population, and color each according to the percentage of the vote that went to the R or D choices.

Thanks to Gastner, Shalizi, and Newman at the U of Mich for the graphic.

Wednesday, 10 November 2004

Day of Rage

I've been reading articles, mostly tongue in cheek, about the stages of grief some of us need to pass through post election. It seems I rushed too quickly to acceptance and have been rollercoastering through the various stages in random order over the last week. My day of rage actually lasted the better part of two days, beginning on Sunday evening and lasting until mid-morning on Tuesday. . . . I was pretty useless for getting anything productive done other than searching the internet for evidence of vote fraud. I'm visualizing the steam that must have been coming out of my ears. It felt particularly galling to find all of the evidence for fraud, and nary a mention of it in the mainstream media. It was clear to me from the start that when pundits were trying to rationalize why the exit polls were so wrong, there was always a different explanation that was at least worth investigation. Indeed prior to the election, I posted about the importance of the audit function of exit polls.

There is a case that inflammatory reporting is imprudent until there is more than speculation to back it up, but still to not acknowledge even the possibility of it seemed like a cover-up or a coordinated taboo. Tuesday morning, I finally found an article in Slate which did acknowledge the speculation, while countering with numbers suggesting it wasn't so. While not convinced, this did calm me down, and I was able to pull out of my altered state. As I told my relative who pointed out more plausible explanations for the mismatch between exit polls and actual returns, "your explanation is plausible, but Karl Rove has demonstrated no scruples, so I'll assume none." Indeed I'm convinced that there is analysis which can and should be done which should show pretty conclusively whether massive fraud was perpetrated or not. Given the number of systems used with no paper trail, and the number of mismatches reported so far, the analysis certainly should be done.

A few links I found Monday:
Counterbias: The Case for Fraud
Joseph Cannon

Dissident Voice
None Dare Call it Voter Suppression and Fraud

Taipei Times
'Blog' blunder sparks debate on US exit polls

Did Bush fix the elections?

Common Dreams
Bill C. Davis

The ostensible narrative this week is that gay marriage ruined the Democrat's chance to defeat Bush. Statistics and polls are being fired at us like buckshot on a goose hunt. But beneath it all is the steady rumbling that the exit polls, as in Florida 2000, were right and that the machines and the vote count were rigged. This would replace the ostensible narrative with a more troubling story. That story would be that they – the occupants; the current force majeur – refuse to lose and they orchestrate their wins on a mechanical, technical level to secure the presidency of an essentially amoral man and then say he was elected because of moral values.

There are, of course, a lot more. And a recent email I received suggests Kerry has hinted that he might consider "unconceding". The ultimate Flip-Flop - what fun!

[UPDATE: As I continue to receive missives from various sources about fraud, from the credible to the ridiculous, it seems the most likely case for fraud that could have made a difference is from none other than South Florida. Slate reports. I have come to the conclusion that the media is wise to go slow on this and not fan flames prematurely.]

Saturday, 6 November 2004

Moving forward

America has made a grievous error.

I'm not going to spend much effort analyzing why. As Matthew Yglesias notes, "these things are multicausal. Elections are complicated." When elections are very close it's easy enough to make the argument that the results hinged on one particular cause (e.g., the Massachusetts gay marriage court decision), but there are dozens of factors that moved significant chunks of votes one way or another. It's simplistic to single out one or two as being crucial.

I was surprised by the result. Nonetheless the best I was hoping for was a 52-47 break for Kerry. Either way we're talking about closely split electorate. A real surprise would have been for either candidate to have a 10 point victory. It's really remarkable how the media pundits imbue the opinions and feelings of what's really a small minority of voters - those voting for the first time, or those who remained on the fence until the end - with so much meaning. Of course they are very important, because they have a great deal to do with the ultimate result. But let us not confuse their decision with the decision of the country at large. An overwhelming majority of Americans voted the way they had planned to vote two years ago, even before we knew who the Democratic nominee would be.

Too much of all that; what now?

In the last several years millions of progressives have made connections through organizations like MoveOn, Democracy for America, and countless other issues oriented groups which have been energized by a commitment to fighting against disturbing trends in our nation's governance. As awful as a continued Bush presidency is likely to be, it does provide a nucleus around which to rally our resolve. Bush may talk about reaching out to those who voted for his opponent, but the fact remains that his agenda for this country remains an anathema to many of us who value economic justice, stewardship of the environment, respect for various cultures, scientific inquiry unburdened by the agenda of profiteers, consumer protection, and world peace.

But let's be honest. Many if not most of Bush's supporters share a large portion of those values, and earnestly believe we are mistaken about how best to get there. If what is heard most from the 'left' is how stupid and ignorant the yahoos that voted for Bush are, then we will marginalize ourselves, and give credence to mockery from the other side. Plenty of intelligent and compassionate people made a weighted decision that the country would be better off with Bush than with Kerry. Plenty of them don't even particularly like Bush. Attacking Bush's supporters is simply counterproductive. Attacking the 'religious right' generically as zealous hypocrites, when they know themselves, and know that they do care about the less fortunate in our society, and even in poor nations around the world, simply cements their belief that we are the arrogant know-it-alls who don't, in fact, know it all.

What needs to happen instead is to focus investigation on policy and its effect. Bush will be able to enact a great deal of legislation in the next four years which will have deleterious effects on many undeserving victims. We will need to find those stories and tell them, relentlessly. We will be well served to be civil in our discourse, but we need not avoid harshness when it's warranted. And I'm afraid it will be frequently warranted. We need to define our alternative policies and get our representatives to vote for them. Filibusters may be occasionally appropriate, but if they become the order of the day, Democrats will just be seen as obstructionists and lose further ground in Congress in 2006. It is better to vote against the bad bills and lose, and let the blame rest squarely where it belongs when the results of those bills come home to roost. There's no particular reason to believe bipartisanship will be strong in the next four years. Alliances with moderates across the aisle could be important in removing some of the worst pieces of legislation, but I don't hold out much faith for that being a major source of solace.

We also must continue the organization and movement that is now one of the strongest progressive movements America has ever known. We have tools at our disposal, and the Bill of Rights has not yet been overturned. If the administration overreaches in stifling our free speech rights, I still believe a majority of Americans will cry foul, even if they don't agree with our speech.

The arts will remain a major source of free expression, and one that can reach across ideological boundaries. We should expect an explosion of activity from creative people the world over, whether it's street theater, web humor, public poetry slams, or more conventional writing and theater presentations.

Personally, I will continue my crusade to push the point that reasonable people can have radical ideas, and society can benefit by synthesizing wisdom from disparate perspectives. Good people abound throughout society, including positions of influence in government or the boardrooms of industry. Alliances with these people are essential in keeping our hope alive.

The results of this election are a bitter disappointment. Some grieving is appropriate. But as I keep hear people saying, tomorrow the sun will still rise. People will still strive to move forward and great hope always remains. In the coming months, I plan to start featuring profiles of heroes and sages, both of our time and of times past. These people who persevered through monumental hardship to accomplish great strides provide enormous inspiration to those of us who may see obstacles to our progress as overwhelming.

Keep the faith!

Tuesday, 2 November 2004

The Long Haul

It was really nice to see Kos wax eloquently over at one of the most read progressive blogs on the net: was merely a battle in a long war. The GOP built its electoral dominance over 40 years by building a massive, well-funded message, training, and media machine.

We started putting ours together last year.

You all have much to be proud of. But please don't think your job is done, or that your hard work was all for naught. It's not, and it wasn't.

This is just the beginning, not the end. Regardless of who takes that oath next January we still have a war to wage. We won't wage it with violence, but by building a solid foundation for a new progressive movement.
If Bush pulls out this win, as now appears likely, there will be some intemperate responses by some on the indignant left. But much more common will be the tempered, determined, and coordinated efforts for the causes of peace, justice, dignity, and the protection of our natural world by people of moral conviction all over this planet. Many ordinary people can do extraordinary things.

We can take lessons from extraordinary people who have come before, and as Kos suggests even from that which we can admire in the "opposition". Indeed, we need to be ready to find allies where we might least expect them, for we cannot win progressive change through isolation and alienation, but only by sharing a moral vision wherever and whenever we can. Heroes who have come before struggled through much worse and kept on going in the bleakest of circumstances, while we still have a presumption of rights from which to start, and means for coordination that Harriet Tubman, for instance, never could have dreamed of.

There's no time for despair - let's keep moving.

Monday, 1 November 2004

Sometimes Subtlety Screams

We may not be a battleground state, but there's no dearth of yard signs on my little island. Big and small, they're all over (including the ones I put at the end of my own driveway). But once name recognition is accomplished, I'm pretty sure most of us don't even really see them anymore, much less allow them to influence our vote.

A week or so ago, I was driving down the highway into town, and noticed a small sign (maybe 4 x 12 inches) on a short stick with one line of white text on a blue background, saying only: COULD IT BE . I noticed it a couple of times and was looking for another sign to complete the message, but it wasn't there. It showed up a couple of days later, in exactly the same dimensions and style 180 feet down the highway: BECAUSE HE LIED?


If you've been directed here by a web search for a particular Congressional race, this is where you (may) want to go.

[Update: If you want to see how wrong I was click here.]

Prognostication is not why I'm here, but it is fun to guess.

Mine is the 10-5 prediction.
10% is the increase in raw votes for W over what he received in 2000.
5% (or more) is how much Kerry will win by in the popular vote.

How does that happen? Huge turnout.

I don't think the electoral college will be that close. I really expect Kerry to take FL, PA, OH, WI, IA, NH, MN, & NM, plus perhaps a surprise or three.

I've already been pushing the idea that Republican control of the House is in jeopardy, and I'm sticking with that, though truth be told it would be more likely to see a pickup of 9 seats by the Dems, leaving them 6 seats short of the majority. Instead I'll be rash and predict a 4 seat majority for the Democrats when the smoke clears.

In the Senate, where the South is likely to produce Democratic losses, I'm predicting an effective tie - 50 R, 49 D, & Jeffords. If the South Carolina "NAACP" shenanigans backfires though, an Inez victory should give the Dems majority control.

And finally, I think we will know by midnight on election day who the President will be.

Sunday, 31 October 2004

The Weight of Decision

Those of us for whom the upcoming decision is blazingly obvious, aren't likely to properly appreciate the burden currently felt by millions of Americans. Those who take their civic responsibility seriously realize the significance of this decision, and based on the premises and beliefs they bring with them, many are being powerfully pulled in two or more directions. And make no mistake, this burden is also being felt even by many who already know for whom they will vote, or who have voted already.

On the right, many who are committed to conservative ideals are deeply troubled by both the fiscal irresponsibility of the Bush administration and the empire building of the neocons running our foreign policy. The American Conservative, magazine founded by Pat Buchanan, had editorial endorsements of five different presidential candidates, as well as one endorsement for not voting. Scott McConnell, in his tepid endorsement of Kerry for this election only, wrote:
Bush has behaved like a caricature of what a right-wing president is supposed to be, and his continuation in office will discredit any sort of conservatism for generations. The launching of an invasion against a country that posed no threat to the U.S., the doling out of war profits and concessions to politically favored corporations, the financing of the war by ballooning the deficit to be passed on to the nation’s children, the ceaseless drive to cut taxes for those outside the middle class and working poor: it is as if Bush sought to resurrect every false 1960s-era left-wing cliché about predatory imperialism and turn it into administration policy.
Buchanan's own endorsement of Bush was equally tepid, while other editors ready to throw their votes to third parties, even to Nader, managed considerably more ardor in their editorials.

On the left, those who rail against the blind faith in corporate beneficence, and the commodification of everything, remain dismayed at the utter abandonment of the rank and file for the corporate dollars seen as necessary for the survival of the party by McAuliffe and the Democratic Leadership Council. There is an argument, essentially the same as McConnell's, but from the perspective that discrediting conservatism for generations would be a welcome long-term development, that a Bush win is actually better long term for the progressive cause. But most compassionate progressives reject such a view:
A traditional revolutionary view of the current scene is tempting: things have to get a lot worse before they can get better. There is not nearly enough pain yet to ignite a revolution, so bring it on. That is how the line of reason goes. Bring on the pain! Revolution, the sooner the better! Of course, the fallacy of this extreme Leftist/Socialist world view follows from their compassion being rooted in their heads, not in their hearts. One cannot dwell in compassion and choose pain for others. Therefore, the irony of choosing strategic suffering should not be tenable—an interesting idea perhaps, but certain to cause great harm."

In the center there is no less angst. Even those not in battleground states worry about the legacy of their vote, when they feel that so much rides on the outcome. Many of strong faith, for instance, are deeply conflicted by what they see as vital moral deficiencies on both sides of the ledger. One such Texan writes:
In my gut, I feel myself ardently hoping for a Kerry win because, among other things, I think it would save the Republican party from the grip of the irresponsible extremists now running the show. The politics of ignorance, fear, and incompetence will have been repudiated, and such would, it seems to me, be good for the whole country as well. Changing horses midstream when your horse is drowning is a perfectly reasonable choice. But in my mind, I think of the unborn lives, those out-of-sight-out-of-mind living statistics, that might be saved as a fairly direct result of a second Bush term, and I can't help thinking that would be worth it.
but three days later resolves his dilemma "I can't support a president singularly for that fact when he has proven a complete disaster everywhere else. I just won't be held hostage."

Here I have brought together three radically disparate perspectives. What they share I believe is an ardent desire to do the right thing in civic duty to their nation. The fact that these three all ultimately decided to pull the lever for Kerry perhaps has more to do with the fact that I, a Kerry supporter, was the selector. It would be possible to quote a wildly disparate group of earnest voters who have decided to support Bush. The point is that our nation benefits from the rational discourse among those willing to put principles ahead of politics. What I want deeply for our nation is an ability for our citizens to hear each other above the platitudes. For pro-choice Americans, like myself, to refrain from assuming that pro-lifers are hypocrites who care nothing about the fate of the babies they want to save. For Libertarians to understand that a desire to rein in the excesses of corporate behavior is not necessarily driven by a simplistic notion that government can solve all our problems. For pacifists, like me, to realize that some of the neocons really do have noble motives behind their willingness to use military force, in spite of our insistence that it is a morally untenable policy. For conservative Christians to realize that secular liberals can be motivated by deeply held moral principles. And so on. It is always possible to find adherents of any position who are shallow and simplistic, or who are mean and motivated primarily by selfish interests. But there are many on all sides who are genuinely trying to balance ideals with realism.

Yes, in the end it is impossible to have a policy that embodies all positions. At times compromise will prevent the best potential of an idea from ever coming to fruition. But in a pluralistic society, compromise we must. The world is a scary place, and it's easy to see the potential for disaster. But if we look hard enough we might discover that people of differing assumptions actually do have dialogs which lead to useful solutions, even in the contentious halls of Congress.

One of the ironies of this bitter election season has been the extent to which it has brought home for me, how much I really do love my country. Let's resolve to continue to take care of it to the best of our abilities regardless of the outcome next week.

The Polls that DO Matter

The polling of the American people has never been so insanely intense, or so insanely ridiculous. We'd probably be better off as a nation if they just didn't exist, though I freely admit I've been following them far too closely. Exit polls are a different story.

Unlike those simply aimed at prognostication, exit polls serve a vital function in monitoring the election, and their elimination would be a harbinger of totalitarianism. I hope this is obvious, and I'm confident they are not going away anytime soon, but just in case, let's make sure we never throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Friday, 29 October 2004

Foley lost in '94; DeLay in '04?

A remarkable 26% of the electorate is polling as undecided in Texas' 22nd Congressional District, where it is widely assumed that Tom DeLay will be reelected. This is according to Democratic challenger Richard Morrison's own polling which shows DeLay ahead approximately 41%-34%. I've seen other polls that show DeLay with numbers closer to 48 or 49 percent, and running 11 or 12 points ahead of Morrison, but anytime an incumbent's numbers are less that 50%, that's cause for concern as undecideds traditionally break heavily for the challenger.

In 1994, I don't remember anyone seriously predicting beforehand that speaker Tom Foley would lose his own reelection campaign. His speakership was considered in jeopardy only because the Democrats might (as they did) lose majority control. I see many parallels this year with voter dissatisfaction, and cannot help but wonder if a surprise is forthcoming. It is true that safe districting has taken root all the more, taking more and more districts out of play, but if there is a year where unanticipated shifts may occur, this is it.

Very troubling too for Republicans, is a recent Harvard University poll showing unprecedented levels of interest in the election by college students nationwide. There is simply so much that's unpredictable this year with the increased interest, that my first advice is to doubt the pundits, and that includes me.

Another update on Tom DeLay's political troubles.
A call to action to help defeat him.]

Thursday, 28 October 2004

The Steamroller

Imagine a mother looking out of a third story window at her 10 month old baby crawling in the street, oblivious to the approaching steamroller. She could scream in distress at the child, who might in response look up bewildered at her, but fail to move out of the way. Or she could fake a happy demeanor and point out to the child something of interest along the side of the road and out of the way. The second approach is probably more effective, but it is harder to manage.

It's an imperfect analogy, but it does get at the frustration some of us feel in our attempt to guide our fellow citizens to what we feel is an obvious choice in the upcoming election.

The steamroller is unbridled corporate power. The baby is the freedom and prosperity of the common folk. The driver of the steamroller may or may not be able to see the baby. The screaming response is shouting that the interests of the many are being sacrificed for the obscene gains for the few. The putting on of a happy face, is avoiding stating the starkness of the truth we believe for fear it will alienate those who have too much investment in the paving of the road to recognize the greater danger. The something of interest along the side of the road is the minor issue we call attention to in lieu of the big one.

One might read into this analogy that I believe that corporations are a hegemonic force of evil that must be brought down at any cost. I don't. Like individuals though, corporations are imperfect and need to have limits set, or else the unscrupulous among them gain the upper hand. I also recognize that "changing the driver" doesn't get rid of the steamroller, but if one comes to the conclusion that the current driver has no motivation to use the brakes in a reasonable fashion, changing the driver is at least a start to getting at the problem.

I conceded that the analogy is imperfect. Most significantly the analogy suggests doom or salvation, when it is clearly not an all or nothing situation. I do not believe that a second Bush presidency wipes out all controls on corporations, nor that a Kerry Presidency will do nearly as much as I would like to rein in the excesses of corporatedom. For another I'm likening the driver to the President/Government of the United States, when clearly corporate power derives from many sources, and exists in the world today apart from the sovereign influence of any one government. Kerry acknowledges that he can't eliminate outsourcing simply by changing the rules for corporations in this country, for instance.

But at the core of my distress about the current administration is their unashamed willingness to consistently put the interests of the boardrooms above the interests of the public at large. Then they sell the program as good for the country and good for the world. All the while the gap between the rich and the poor widens, protections for the environment are gutted, and our wealth is being squandered on risky military adventures whose only certain winners are the corporations being given the lucrative contracts to assist in the effort.

America, wake up!

The Whole Shebang

There are a lot of great sites which gather information on Congressional races around the country, but the best ones split the information on many pages, often separated by state. Here I roll them all into one list.

The National Committee for an Effective Congress [Democratic] (for instance Washington State) is one great source for information on House races. The DCCC has opened up their tracking site for tonight's races.

The non-partisan Politics 1 (for example New York State) was my primary source for this list, and gives more information about each Candidate with links to websites where available, and lists more 3rd party candidates as well. I've provided a link to each state's page by clicking on the state name.

CNN is probably the best place to look at these returns as they come in, and those links are provided by clicking on coverage.

Third parties are included only where one of the major parties did not field a candidate. (I guessed at the most viable candidate.) The incumbent's party is listed in the 2nd column, and the incumbent party's candidate is the left of the two names at the end. Party affiliation is given in parentheses after the candidates name only if it is not D or R. A # before the incumbent party's candidate indicates that the actual incumbent is not running, either because of retirement, or because they are running for the Senate. Louisiana's asterisks are due to their unusual system of allowing multiple candidates of the same party to run followed by run-off elections, and I'm not sure I picked the favorite. Texas's asterisks are cases where two incumbents are running against each other due to redistricting.

Values in the W-02 column, courtesy Gender Gap, show the percentage of votes that the incumbent party received in 2002. Status is an indication for any races considered competitive, the current likelihood of victory. T is Toss-Up, 1 is close lean, 2 favored, 3 strongly favored. Those without an indication presumably would go easily to the incumbent party. These values rely heavily on the statuses indicated at ActBlue, with a few adjustments based on more (Democratically) optimistic prognostications at MyDD.

Here you go:
Dist     Inc  W-02   Status Candidate    Challenger

Alabama results: Alabama - California
AL-01 R 61 Bonner Belk
AL-02 R 69 Everett James
AL-03 R 50 R2 Rogers Fuller
AL-04 R 87 R3 Aderholt Cole
AL-05 D 73 Cramer Wallace
AL-06 R 90 Bachus
AL-07 D 93 D3 Davis Cameron
AK-01 R 75 Young Higgins
AZ-01 R 49 T Renzi Babbitt
AZ-02 R 59 R3 Franks Camacho
AZ-03 R 67 Shadegg Yannone (L)
AZ-04 D 67 Pastor Karg
AZ-05 R 60 R3 Hayworth Rogers
AZ-06 R 65 Flake Stritar (L)
AZ-07 D 58 Grijalva Sweeney
AZ-08 R 63 Kolbe Bacal
AR-01 D 65 Berry Humphrey
AR-02 D 99 D3 Snyder Parks
AR-03 R 99 R3 Boozman Judy
AR-04 D 60 Ross
CA-01 D 64 Thompson Wiesner
CA-02 R 66 Herger Johnson
CA-03 R 62 R3 # Lungren Castillo
CA-04 R 65 Doolittle Winters
CA-05 D 72 Matsui Dugas
CA-06 D 67 Woolsey Erikson
CA-07 D 71 Miller Hargrave
CA-08 D 80 Pelosi DePalma
CA-09 D 82 Lee Bermudez
CA-10 D 76 Tauscher Ketelson
CA-11 R 60 R3 Pombo McNerney
CA-12 D 68 D3 Lantos Garza
CA-13 D 71 Stark Bruno
CA-14 D 68 Eshoo Haugen
CA-15 D 66 D3 Honda Chukwu
CA-16 D 67 D3 Lofgren McNea
CA-17 D 68 Farr Risley
CA-18 D 52 Cardoza Pringle
CA-19 R 67 Radanovich Bufford
CA-20 D 64 D2 # Costa Ashburn
CA-21 R 70 Nunes Davis
CA-22 R 73 Thomas
CA-23 D 59 Capps Regan
CA-24 R 65 R3 Gallegly Wagner
CA-25 R 65 McKeon Willoughby
CA-26 R 64 R3 Dreier Matthews
CA-27 D 62 Sherman Levy
CA-28 D 71 Berman Hernandez
CA-29 D 63 Schiff Scolinos
CA-30 D 70 Waxman Elizalde
CA-31 D 81 Becerra Vega
CA-32 D 69 Solis Faegre (L)
CA-33 D 83 Watson Weber (L)
CA-34 D 74 Allard Miller
CA-35 D 78 Waters Moen
CA-36 D 61 Harman Whitehead
CA-37 D 73 Millender-McD. Van
CA-38 D 71 Napolitano
CA-39 D 55 Sanchez Escobar
CA-40 R 67 Royce Williams
CA-41 R 67 Lewis Mottahedeh (L)
CA-42 R 68 Miller Myers
CA-43 D 67 Baca Laning
CA-44 R 63 Calvert Vandenberg
CA-45 R 65 Bono Meyer
CA-46 R 62 R3 Rohrabacher Brandt
CA-47 D 61 Sanchez Coronado
CA-48 R 68 Cox Graham
CA-49 R 74 R3 Issa Byron
CA-50 R 64 R3 Cunningham Busby
CA-51 D 58 Filner Giorgino
CA-52 R 70 R3 Hunter Keliher
CA-53 D 63 D3 Davis Hunzeker
Colorado results: Colorado - Georgia
CO-01 D 67 DeGette Chicas
CO-02 D 60 Udall Hackman
CO-03 R 66 T # Walcher Salazar
CO-04 R 55 R3 Musgrave Matsunaka
CO-05 R 71 Hefley Hardee
CO-06 R 68 R3 Tancredo Conti
CO-07 R 47 R1 Beauprez Thomas
CT-01 D 67 D3 Larson Halstead
CT-02 R 54 R1 Simmons Sullivan
CT-03 D 66 D3 DeLauro Elser
CT-04 R 64 R1 Shays Farrell
CT-05 R 54 Johnson Gerratana
DE-01 R 72 Castle Donnelly
FL-01 R 75 Miller Coutu
FL-02 D 67 D2 Boyd Kilmer
FL-03 D 59 Brown Brown (I)
FL-04 R 100 Crenshaw Grayson (I)
FL-05 R 48 R3 Brown-Waite Whittel
FL-06 R 65 R3 Stearns Bruderly
FL-07 R 60 Mica
FL-08 R 65 R3 Keller Murray
FL-09 R 72 Bilirakis Pasayan (I)
FL-10 R 100 Young Derry
FL-11 D 100 Davis Johnson (L)
FL-12 R 100 R3 Putnam Hagenmaier
FL-13 R 55 R2 Harris Schneider
FL-14 R 100 # Mack Neeld
FL-15 R 63 Weldon Pristoop
FL-16 R 79 R3 Foley Fisher
FL-17 D 100 Meek Musa (SW)
FL-18 R 69 R3 Ros-Lehtinen Sheldon
FL-19 D 72 Wexler
FL-20 D 100 # Schultz Hostetter
FL-21 R 100 Diaz-Balart Gonzalez (L)
FL-22 R 60 Shaw Rorapaugh
FL-23 D 78 Hastings
FL-24 R 62 Feeney
FL-25 R 65 Diaz-Balart
GA-01 R 72 Kingston
GA-02 D 100 Bishop Eversman
GA-03 D 51 Marshall Clay
GA-04 D 77 D3 # McKinney Davis
GA-05 D 100 Lewis
GA-06 R 80 # Price Pelphrey (wi)
GA-07 R 79 Linder
GA-08 R 78 R3 # Westmoreland Delamar
GA-09 R 73 R3 Norwood Ellis
GA-10 R 100 Deal
GA-11 R 52 R2 Gingrey Crawford
GA-12 R 55 T Burns Barrow
GA-13 D 60 Scott
Hawaii results: Hawaii - Louisiana
HI-01 D 69 Abercrombie Tanonaka
HI-02 D SE* Case Gabbard
ID-01 R 59 Otter Preston
ID-02 R 68 Simpson Whitworth
IL-01 D 81 Rush Wardingley
IL-02 D 82 D3 Jackson Sailor (L)
IL-03 D 100 # D Lipinski Chlada
IL-04 D 80 Gutierrez Cisneros
IL-05 D 67 Emanuel Best
IL-06 R 65 R3 Hyde Cegelis
IL-07 D 83 Davis Davis-Fairman
IL-08 R 57 R1 Crane Bean
IL-09 D 70 Schakowsky Eckhardt
IL-10 R 69 R3 Kirk Goodman
IL-11 R 65 R3 Weller Renner
IL-12 D 69 Costello Zweigart
IL-13 R 70 Biggert Andersen
IL-14 R 74 R3 Hastert Zamora
IL-15 R 65 R3 Johnson Gill
IL-16 R 71 Manzullo Kutsch
IL-17 D 62 Evans Zinga
IL-18 R 100 LaHood Waterworth
IL-19 R 55 R3 Shimkus Bagwell
IN-01 D 67 Visclosky Leyva
IN-02 R 50 R2 Chocola Donnelly
IN-03 R 63 Souder Parra
IN-04 R 71 R3 Buyer Sanders
IN-05 R 72 Burton Carr
IN-06 R 64 R3 Pence Fox
IN-07 D 53 D3 Carson Horning
IN-08 R 51 R1 Hostettler Jennings
IN-09 D 51 D1 Hill Sodrel
IA-01 R 57 R2 Nussle Gluba
IA-02 R 52 R3 Leach Franker
IA-03 D 53 D2 Boswell Thompson
IA-04 R 55 R3 Latham Johnson
IA-05 R 62 R3 King Schulte
KS-01 R 91 Moran Warner (L)
KS-02 R 60 R3 Ryun Boyda
KS-03 D 50 D1 Moore Kobach
KS-04 R 61 Tiahrt Kinard
KY-01 R 65 Whitfield Cartwright
KY-02 R 70 Lewis Smith
KY-03 R 52 R1 Northup Miller
KY-04 D 51 T # Clooney Davis
KY-05 R 78 Rogers
KY-06 D SE* D2 Chandler Buford
LA-01 R 81 # Jindal* Armstrong*
LA-02 D 64 Jefferson Schwertz
LA-03 R 87 T # Romero* Baldone*
LA-04 R 72 McCrery
LA-05 R 50 R2 Alexander* Blakes
LA-06 R 84 Baker Craig*
LA-07 D 87 T # Mount* Thibodaux*
Maine results: Maine - Missouri
ME-01 D 64 D3 Allen Summers
ME-02 D 52 D2 Michaud Hamel
MD-01 R 77 Gilchrest Alexakis
MD-02 D 55 D3 Ruppersberger Brooks
MD-03 D 66 Cardin Duckworth
MD-04 D 79 Wynn McKinnis
MD-05 D 70 Hoyer Jewitt
MD-06 R 66 Bartlett Bosley
MD-07 D 74 Cummings Salazar
MD-08 D 52 Hollen Floyd
MA-01 D 68 Olver Adam
MA-02 D 100 Neal
MA-03 D 100 McGovern Crews
MA-04 D 100 Frank Morse
MA-05 D 60 Meehan Tierney
MA-06 D 68 Tierney O'Malley
MA-07 D 100 Markey Chase
MA-08 D 100 Capuano
MA-09 D 100 Lynch
MA-10 D 69 Delahunt Jones
MI-01 D 68 Stupak Hooper
MI-02 R 70 Hoekstra Kotos
MI-03 R 70 Ehlers Hickey
MI-04 R 68 R3 Camp Huckleberry
MI-05 D 92 Kildee Kirkwood
MI-06 R 69 Upton Elliott
MI-07 R 60 R3 # Schwarz Renier
MI-08 R 68 R3 Rogers Alexander
MI-09 R 58 Knollenberg Reifman
MI-10 R 63 Miller Casey
MI-11 R 57 McCotter Truran
MI-12 D 68 Levin Shaffer
MI-13 D 92 Kilpatrick Cassell
MI-14 D 83 Conyers Pedraza
MI-15 D 72 Dingell Reamer
MN-01 R 62 Gutknecht Pomeroy
MN-02 R 53 R2 Kline Daly
MN-03 R 72 R2 Ramstad Watts
MN-04 D 62 McCollum Bataglia
MN-05 D 67 Sabo Mathias
MN-06 R 57 R1 Kennedy Wetterling
MN-07 D 65 Peterson Sturrock
MN-08 D 69 Oberstar Groettum
MS-01 R 71 Wicker Washer (Ref)
MS-02 D 54 D3 Thompson LeSueur
MS-03 R 64 Pickering Magee (Ref)
MS-04 D 75 D3 Taylor Lott
MO-01 D 70 Clay Farr
MO-02 R 67 Akin Weber
MO-03 D 59 D2 # Carnahan Federer
MO-04 D 67 Skelton Noland
MO-05 D 66 D2 # Cleaver Patterson
MO-06 R 63 R2 Graves Broomfield
MO-07 R 75 R3 Blunt Newberry
MO-08 R 72 Emerson Henderson
MO-09 R 68 R3 Hulshof Jacobsen
Montana results: Montana - New York
MT-01 R 65 R3 Rehberg Velazquez
NE-01 R 85 R2 # Fortenberry Connealy
NE-02 R 63 R3 Terry Thompson
NE-03 R 93 Osborne Anderson
NV-01 D 54 D3 Berkley Mickelson
NV-02 R 74 Gibbons Cochran
NV-03 R 56 R1 Porter Gallagher
New Hampshire
NH-01 R 58 R2 Bradley Nadeau
NH-02 R 57 R2 Bass Hodes
New Jersey
NJ-01 D 93 Andrews Hutchison
NJ-02 R 69 LoBiondo Robb
NJ-03 R 65 R3 Saxton Conaway
NJ-04 R 66 R3 Smith Vasquez
NJ-05 R 60 R3 Garrett Wolfe
NJ-06 D 67 Pallone Fernandez
NJ-07 R 58 R2 Ferguson Brozak
NJ-08 D 67 Pascrell Ajjan
NJ-09 D 70 Rothman Trawinski
NJ-10 D 84 Payne Washington (G)
NJ-11 R 72 Frelinghuysen Buell
NJ-12 D 60 D3 Holt Spadea
NJ-13 D 78 Menendez Piatkowski
New Mexico
NM-01 R 55 R1 Wilson Romero
NM-02 R 56 R2 Pearce King
NM-03 D 100 Udall Tucker
New York results: Montana - New York
NY-01 D 50 D1 Bishop Manger
NY-02 D 58 Israel Hoffmann
NY-03 R 72 King Mathies
NY-04 D 56 D2 McCarthy Garner
NY-05 D 93 Ackerman Graves
NY-06 D 96 Meeks
NY-07 D 73 Crowley Cinquemain
NY-08 D 74 Nadler Hort
NY-09 D 65 Weiner Cronin
NY-10 D 96 Towns Clarke
NY-11 D 86 Owens Lieberman (C/SC)
NY-12 D 95 Velazquez Rodriguez
NY-13 R 70 R3 Fossella Barbaro
NY-14 D 75 Maloney Srdanovic
NY-15 D 87 Rangel Jefferson
NY-16 D 92 Serrano Mohamed
NY-17 D 62 Engel Brennan
NY-18 D 92 Lowey Hoffman
NY-19 R 70 R3 Kelly Jalamin
NY-20 R 73 R3 Sweeney Kelly
NY-21 D 75 McNulty Redlich
NY-22 D 64 Hinchey Brenner
NY-23 R 100 McHugh Johnson
NY-24 R 71 Boehlert Miller
NY-25 R 72 Walsh Hawkins (P&J)
NY-26 R 74 R3 Reynolds Davis
NY-27 R 69 T # Naples Higgins
NY-28 D 62 Slaughter Laba
NY-29 R 73 R3 # Kuhl Barend
North Carolina results: North Carolina - Pennsylvania
NC-01 D SE* Butterfield Dority
NC-02 D 65 Etheridge Creech
NC-03 R 84 Jones Eaton
NC-04 D 61 Price Batchelor
NC-05 R 70 R2 # Foxx Harrell
NC-06 R 90 Coble Jordan
NC-07 D 71 McIntyre Plonk
NC-08 R 54 R2 Hayes Troutman
NC-09 R 72 R3 Myrick Flynn
NC-10 R 59 R3 # McHenry Fischer
NC-11 R 56 R2 Taylor Keever
NC-12 D 65 Watt Fisher
NC-13 D 55 D2 Miller Johnson
North Dakota
ND-01 D 52 Pomeroy Sand
Ohio results: North Carolina - Pennsylvania
OH-01 R 65 R3 Chabot Harris
OH-02 R 74 Portman Sanders
OH-03 R 59 R3 Turner Mitakides
OH-04 R 67 R3 Oxley Konop
OH-05 R 67 R3 Gilmor Weirauch
OH-06 D 59 Strickland Murphy (?)
OH-07 R 68 R3 Hobson Anastasio
OH-08 R 71 Boehner Hardenbrook
OH-09 D 74 D3 Kaptur Kaczala
OH-10 D 74 Kucinich Herman
OH-11 D 76 Jones
OH-12 R 65 Tiberi Brown
OH-13 D 69 Brown Lucas
OH-14 R 72 R3 LaTourette Cafaro
OH-15 R 67 Pryce Brown
OH-16 R 67 R3 Regula Seemann
OH-17 D 51 D3 Ryan Cusimano
OH-18 R 100 Ney Thomas
OK-01 R 56 Sullivan Dodd
OK-02 D 76 D2 # Boren Smalley
OK-03 R 76 Lucas Wilson (Ind)
OK-04 R 54 Cole Bradshaw (Ind)
OK-05 R 62 Istook Smith
Oregon results: North Carolina - Pennsylvania
OR-01 D 62 D2 Wu Ameri
OR-02 R 72 R3 Walden McColgan
OR-03 D 67 D3 Blumenauer Mars
OR-04 D 64 DeFazio Feldkamp
OR-05 D 55 D2 Hooley Zupancic
Pennsylvania results: North Carolina - Pennsylvania
PA-01 D 86 Brady Williams
PA-02 D 88 Fattah Bolno
PA-03 R 78 English Porter
PA-04 R 65 Hart Drobac
PA-05 R 87 Peterson Martin (L)
PA-06 R 51 R1 Gerlach Murphy
PA-07 R 63 Weldon Scoles
PA-08 R 63 T # Fitzpatrick Schrader
PA-09 R 70 Shuster Politis
PA-10 R 93 Sherwood Hannevig (C)
PA-11 D 56 Kanjorski Brenneman (C)
PA-12 D 74 Murtha
PA-13 D 51 D1 # Schwartz Brown
PA-14 D 100 Doyle
PA-15 R 57 R1 # Dent Driscoll
PA-16 R 88 R3 Pitts Herr
PA-17 D 51 D1 Holden Paterno
PA-18 R 60 R3 Murphy Boles
PA-19 R 91 Platts Sheeder (G)
Rhode Island results: Rhode Island - Utah
RI-01 D 60 Kennedy Rogers
RI-02 D 76 Langevin Barton
South Carolina
SC-01 R 90 Brown Dunn (G)
SC-02 R 84 Wilson Ellisor
SC-03 R 67 Barrett
SC-04 R 69 Inglis Brown
SC-05 D 86 Spratt Spencer
SC-06 D 67 Clyburn McLeod (C)
South Dakota
SD-01 D SE* D1 Herseth Diedrich
Tennessee results: Rhode Island - Utah
TN-01 R 100 Jenkins Leonard
TN-02 R 79 Duncan Greene
TN-03 R 65 Wamp Wolfe
TN-04 D 52 D2 Davis Bowling
TN-05 D 64 Cooper Knapp
TN-06 D 66 Gordon Demas
TN-07 R 71 Blackburn
TN-08 D 70 Tanner Hart
TN-09 D 84 Ford Fort
Texas results: Rhode Island - Utah
TX-01 D 56 T Sandlin Gohmert
TX-02 D 61 T Lampson Poe
TX-03 R 74 Johnson Vessels (L)
TX-04 R 58 R3 # Hall Nickerson
TX-05 R 58 Hensarling Bernstein
TX-06 R 71 R3 Barton Meyer
TX-07 R 89 Culberson Martinez
TX-08 R 93 Brady Wright
TX-09 D 59 D3 # Green Molina
TX-10 D 84 R3 # Sadun (wi) McCaul
TX-11 D 52 R4 # Raasch Conaway
TX-12 R 92 R3 Granger Alvarado
TX-13 R 69 Thornberry Smith (L)
TX-14 R 68 Paul
TX-15 D 100 Hinojosa Thamm
TX-16 D 100 Reyes Brigham
TX-17 D 51 D1 Edwards Wohlgemuth
TX-18 D 77 Lee Sullivan (L)
TX-19 R 92 T Neugebauer* Stenholm*
TX-20 D 100 Gonzalez Scott
TX-21 R 73 Smith Smith
TX-22 R 63 R3 DeLay Morrison
TX-23 R 51 Bonilla Sullivan
TX-24 D 65 R4 # Page Marchant
TX-25 D 55 D3 Doggett Klein
TX-26 R 75 Burgess Reyes
TX-27 D 61 Ortiz Vaden
TX-28 D 71 D3 # Cuellar Hopson
TX-29 D 95 Green Messina (L)
TX-30 D 74 Johnson Davis (L)
TX-31 R 69 Carter Porter
TX-32 R 68 T Sessions* Frost*
Utah results: Rhode Island - Utah
UT-01 R 61 Bishop Thompson
UT-02 D 50 D1 Matheson Swallow
UT-03 R 67 Cannon Babka
Vermont results: Vermont - Wyoming
VT-01 Ind 65 Sanders (Ind) Drown (D)
Virginia results: Vermont - Wyoming
VA-01 R 96 Davis Lee (Ind)
VA-02 R 83 R2 # Drake Ashe
VA-03 D 96 D3 Scott Sears
VA-04 R 98 R3 Forbes Menefee
VA-05 R 63 R3 Goode Weed
VA-06 R 97 Goodlatte
VA-07 R 69 Cantor Blanton (G)
VA-08 D 60 D2 Moran Cheney
VA-09 D 66 D2 Boucher Triplett
VA-10 R 72 R3 Wolf Socas
VA-11 R 83 R3 Davis Longmyer
Washington results: Vermont - Wyoming
WA-01 D 55 D3 Inslee Eastwood
WA-02 D 51 D2 Larson Sinclair
WA-03 D 63 D3 Baird Crowson
WA-04 R 66 R3 Hastings Matheson
WA-05 R 62 R1 # McMorris Barbieri
WA-06 D 64 D3 Dicks Cloud
WA-07 D 75 McDermott Cassady
WA-08 R 60 T # Reichert Ross
WA-09 D 58 D3 Smith Lord
West Virginia results: Vermont - Wyoming
WV-01 D 100 Mollohan Parks
WV-02 R 60 R3 Capito Wells
WV-03 D 70 Rahall Snuffer
Wisconsin results: Vermont - Wyoming
WI-01 R 67 Ryan Thomas
WI-02 D 66 D3 Baldwin Magnum
WI-03 D 63 Kind Schultz
WI-04 D 76 D3 # Moore Boyle
WI-05 R 86 R3 Sensenbrenner Kennedy
WI-06 R 100 Petri Hall
WI-07 D 64 D3 Obey Miles (G)
WI-08 R 73 Green LeClair
Wyoming results: Vermont - Wyoming
WY-01 R 61 R3 Cubin Ladd

* SE = Current Congressperson chosen in Special Election since 2002