Shadegg Retires

Forgive the intrusion of some non-presidential news, but the retirement of Rep. John Shadegg -- by my count the 26th Republican to call it quits this cycle -- reminds us of one of the foundational principles of politics today, which is that all signs point to an enormous lack of energy among rank-and-file Republicans and the likelihood that the next president will govern with the Democrats having enlarged their majorities in the House and Senate. Just last week, two Republicans on the appropriations committee announced their retirements, too. That doesn't happen if you're confident about regaining a majority in November.

Shadegg's seat isn't in danger -- he routinely gets 60% of the vote -- but in retiring, conservatives lose of their more innovative members. Shadegg intends to run for John McCain's Senate seat.

Comments

I believe it's 29.

That's a hair under 15% of their entire House caucus.

Posted by Brad | February 11, 2008 10:56 PM

Mr. Shadegg:
You were a stalwart in the cause of conservatism.
This will not be forgotten by the faithful. Do
what needs to be done in your life and c'mon
back when the time to help us fight the fight
is in your blood. We need you and your kind.

Posted by interferon | February 12, 2008 1:12 AM

Shadegg's seat would have been in danger - he has some real scandals brewing, and a more serious challenger this year than in previous cycles.

Posted by Anonymous | February 12, 2008 7:36 AM

I'm not sure that I understand how it's a loss if a House Republican becomes a Senate Republican. Because it's not a net gain?

Posted by Kriston Capps | February 12, 2008 8:32 AM

Hello, Marc, commenters-

Kriston Capps - per your question, which is a good one:

The majorities are measured by each chamber separately. One party has control of the House with 218 + members; with 51 + members of the Senate. The total number is of no consequence, although obviously each party would prefer to have as many members as possible in both.

To illustrate: Democrats will keep control of both chambers if they have 218 House seats and 51 Senate seats, a total of 269 seats. They would only have control of one chamber, hypothetically speaking, if they had 200 House seats and 75 Senate seats - even though the COMBINED total of Democrats on Capitol Hill was greater, at 275, than the 269 total.

If a House member seeks election to the Senate, he/she, by definition, will lose his/her House seat, regardless of the outcome of the Senate race.

So, to use Shadegg, McCain, and the GOP as the example:

If McCain wins the Presidency, his seat would be temporarily filled by a Democrat, due to the fact that the governor of Arizona is Democrat Janet Napolitano. The seat next comes up for a full term in 2010.

If McCain does not win the Presidency, he may or may not seek another Senate term. But Shadegg is leaving now, well before that question is determined.

Also, from the perspective of the House GOP leadership, Shadegg's departure for any reason does them no good. From their perspective, it's more desirable that he WIN his Senate race, but they will have to defend his House seat anyhow by recruiting a candidate. As Marc pointed out, defending his seat in particular shouldn't be difficult, but it's more aggravation for them than it would have been, if he had stayed...

I hope that clarifies it...

Posted by ElectionNightHQ.com (McCain site) Publisher | February 12, 2008 12:08 PM