Other Columns by Mike Bayham
Mike Bayham Bio

Printer-Friendly Version

Louisiana GOP: Back To The Drawing Board
By Mike Bayham
December 9, 2002

After one of the most spirited runs for a US Senate seat in Louisiana history, the Republican Party received a double whammy in the bayou, losing both its bid to topple an incumbent Democratic US Senator and being on the short end of a bigger upset in the 5th Congressional district.

One could make the argument that once again the hapless Louisiana GOP snatched defeat from the jaws of victory in both cases. The 5th district is a solidly Republican area only less Republican leaning than the 1st District in suburban New Orleans where a significant Democratic candidate and parochial titan finished fifth in a six Republican field. Yet Democratic State Representative Rodney Alexander bested Republican candidate and former congressional aide Lee Fletcher in the runoff. In the US Senate election, Mary Landrieu, who found herself once again in the position of underdog against a surging Terrell candidacy, powered by national figures and dollars, was able to fend off her challenger by a modest margin.

With the results finalized, so begins the post-election ritual of engaging in armchair quarterbacking if you are a Democrat or conducting the post-campaign autopsy (to borrow a phrase from a local paper) if you are a Republican.

Republican Indignation and Democratic Victory

Mary Landrieu, Norma Jane Sabiston (Mary's campaign manager) and her campaign staff are due congratulations and accolades for pulling out an impressive victory. Sure she started the campaign 6 million dollars and a bevy of percentage points above her Republican challengers in the polls. Sure she is an incumbent US Senator. The reality of the situation was that after the November primary, Mary Landrieu was running scared.

Team Landrieu was counting, not hoping but counting, on a primary win, regardless of what spin her campaign was putting out after it became apparent she would have a not so sweet November. Though her 46% showing was impressive to non-political junkies, it was a serious political defeat for the incumbent that put her in a duel against a neighboring politician in the unchatered waters of a December runoff. Worse yet, Terrell was closing the money gap and then some in the general election. Because Louisiana went heavy to Bush in 2000, Landrieu was also hurt by not being able to bring in national Democratic figures to motivate her base, though some were snuck into the state.

Did the Landrieu campaign perform like ladies and gentlemen? No, though the other side wasn't wearing white dresses either. Did they perform like professionals? Did they race bait? Did they engage in economic warfare pitting poor versus rich? The answer to these questions is the same to this question: did Landrieu win?

Many of the tactics employed by the NAACP, the Louisiana Democratic Party, and other independent expenditure outfits were distasteful to say the least. Signs scattered around black neighborhoods in New Orleans carried the message in actual eubonic dialect "We ain't goin back," leading one to wonder if they sign implied that a Republican victory would mean a reinstatement of slavery or a return to "colored" signs over selected water fountains. One group, looking to raise the scare tactics bar, distributed fans at a football game between two of Louisiana's largest black colleges with pictures of enslaved blacks working on plantations with the message that if they don't vote, such days could very well return.

Another play on racial tensions was a spot paid for by the Louisiana Democratic Party that was run on black radio that kept replaying the phrase that "this is an election, not an auction." Now obviously the other party can sheepishly hide behind the logic that by auction they were referring to the amount of money the national GOP was spending on electing Terrell though the fact of the matter is that the venue used to deliver the message betrays the true intentions of the statement, with auctions being the manner in which many slaves were sold.

While whites and blacks should be indignant over such obnoxious political overtures that does not mean Republicans shouldn't have expected it. One of the most infamous tactics used by Democrats in a political campaign were advertisements that told blacks that every vote for a Republican equaled to another black church being burned. Such maneuvers paid off big time in which Landrieu received an astronomically high percentage of the black vote and was able to generate a large turnout in black areas.

Black voters were not the only segment of the electorate to be the target of shameless campaign demagoguery. Class warfare was injected generously with white voters in which claims of Republican assaults against the state's sugar industry and GOP tax cuts for the rich were used to tear away potential Terrell voters. In what had to be the cleverest move by Landrieu, she had a red beans and rice dinner at a union hall with the salt of the earth at the same time Terrell hosted a $1,000 a plate fundraiser with President George W. Bush. The contrast played well in the media with Landrieu minimizing much of the damage incurred by the popular president's visit to the state.

Scalped By The Pale Faces

Legend has it that Huey Long knew he had lost his first bid for governor in 1924 only minutes after the polls closed. A supporter had rung him up with the seemingly good news that he had received 60 votes in one ballot box while his opposition had received one. Long replied "I'm beat" and stated that he had expected to receive 100 at that voting location while his opposition was to get one vote.

I knew the election was over at 8:15 PM. I did not have access to an exit poll or the results of half of the state's precincts to come to such a conclusion. My judgment was based upon the results of the Cameron Parish returns. Just a little bit of history on Cameron Parish, it was carved from Calcasieu Parish (Lake Charles) by Reconstruction Republican Governor Henry Clay Warmouth in order to stack the State Legislature in the days when a parish, regardless of size, was entitled to a seat in the State Assembly. The parish is primarily swamp land making it one of the least populated areas of the state.

Demographically Cameron has the smallest black population in the state indicating that the Democrats had a small ethnic base in the parish. Politically it went to George W. Bush by over 1,000 votes. Because of the small population more or less concentrated on what terra firma it has, the votes of the entire parish were recorded quickly. Landrieu carried the parish by 2 votes. Even with 98% of the state precincts still out, the Cameron omen spelled the end of the campaign only minutes after balloting had ended.

The trend continued elsewhere as the numbers came in throughout the night. In some parishes where Bush won, Terrell lost. In many other parishes where Bush won big, Terrell barely carried. In Baton Rouge, the home of 1996 Republican candidate Woody Jenkins who was greatly lambasted for not carrying by a greater margin, Terrell was edged out by Landrieu.

A friend of mine, in the same vein as the Kingfish's runner, reported to me the "good news" that St. Bernard Parish had gone to Terrell by 1,000 votes. The person was astounded when I responded that such a showing in St. Bernard was a Pyrrhic victory at best, for Landrieu had received only 43% in St. Bernard in 1996 and Bush had carried the parish by over 4,500 votes in 2000.

There were a few bright spots for the Republicans such as Livingston Parish and St. Tammany, where Terrell won by close to 2 to 1 margins over the incumbent. Unfortunately they tended to be the exceptions to trend rather than common examples. Though Republicans can lament till the cows come in about the solid black vote Landrieu received, the busing by the NAACP and other affiliated organizations or how they played the race card like a Vegas blackjack dealer, this election was won for Landrieu and lost by Terrell in the white area.

Terrell was also handicapped by having a campaign staff and organization that was very green, in terms of experience not in sympathy with the ideology of Ralph Nader.

With Friends Like These...

I am starting to think that the GOP should retire the image of Ronald Reagan as the symbol of the Republican Party in addition to scrapping his once sacred 11th commandment. They should instead be replaced with a more appropriate symbol and motto: a large portrait of the cartoon "Pogo" surrounded with his immortal words "We have met the enemy, and he is us."

If the Republican Party could only do one third of the damage they do to themselves to the Democrats, we would be a dangerous entity indeed.

The Republican Party, locally and nationally, did things that added unneeded burdens to Terrell's campaign or failed to do other things that would have helped. After making the runoff, Terrell was not exactly embraced by some of the state's more prominent Republican leaders.

State Representative Tony Perkins, who ran fourth in the primary, held out on endorsing Terrell and publicly maintained his reservations concerning her true commitment to conservative ideals. However, Perkins did come a long eventually and his immediate post-election commentary about Terrell's philosophical sincerity was forgotten while his base came out for Terrell in the second election. Unfortunately, several others were not so sporting.

Congressman John Cooksey, whose rhetoric landed himself in hot water while discussing post-September 11th security measures, did no favors for Terrell. After initially giving Terrell his endorsement on the night of the primary, Cooksey did an about face and scolded Terrell several times in the press for having supposedly run a negative campaign. Cooksey further stated that he would do nothing else aside from issuing his endorsement which made it worth about as much as ten Italian Lire.

Since he had given up his congressional seat to run for the US Senate, his lack of cooperation and flashes of belligerence did not help the Terrell effort in an area that was going to have a spiked turnout with the 5th Congressional runoff being on the ballot at the same time. It is likely that there were a number of Cooksey loyalists that followed their leader's impertinence and either voted for Landrieu or simply voted for Cooksey's aide in the 5th district while not casting a ballot for US Senate.

One would think that having a Republican governor, especially one who has one of the highest approval ratings of any other state executive in the nation, would be a tremendous asset to a Republican candidate running for statewide office. The fundraising and stumping potential of such a prominent figure would be a political goldmine for the state party. Only in a "bizzaro" world out of the Superman comic books would such a scenario not be. Bienvenue a la Louisiane.

Republican Governor Mike Foster publicly chastised Suzie Terrell in the early days of the general election and made several statements that indicated that he may very well endorse Landrieu. His half-hearted endorsement of Terrell came at the prodding of the President of the United States and may not have come along at all if Al Gore instead of George Bush was in the White House. Aside from refraining from casting any other barbs at Terrell, he did nothing else for her campaign for his endorsement was considered as forced and empty as Cooksey's, who, coincidentally, was endorsed by Foster in the primary.

Though he might not be toasted as much in conservative circles as he was in the earlier, more Republican days of his regime, Foster can still move a great number of votes and could have helped make the difference in the election had he taken an active role. But some were happy to have Foster busy himself with retiring to his blind shooting ducks instead of standing in front of television cameras rhetorically shooting the bird at Terrell.

It was one thing when Cleo Fields was not budging for Landrieu for Foster to sit it out but when Fields, whose "support" is worth more than his endorsement, came out for his erstwhile intraparty nemesis, Foster should have countered that by coming out strong for Terrell and explaining away his previous remarks. Instead, Foster's sloth, whether inspired by malice or laziness, contributed to Terrell's defeat by his lack of participation and enthusiasm in one of the most important elections in Louisiana.

The Terrell campaign was not even spared by the antics of the national Republicans, who were among her earliest allies in her US Senate bid. Several of the independent expenditure commercials run in Louisiana were just plain bad. One of them opened up by saying "Mary Landrieu such a good family, such a great disappointment." Aside from the fact that there are people out there who would take issue with the former assessment of Senator Landrieu's lineage, the advertisement had one of the nastiest tones of the campaign and furthermore, failed to really have a point that would connect with the voters. It was one of many mean-spirited advertisements that did more to sour people on Terrell than Landrieu.

Bush's dismissal of Paul O'Neill, his Treasury Secretary, the day before the election over the state of the economy was a gaffe that certainly cost Terrell votes amongst centrists. The move was more a less an admission that the economy was in the tank and it hurt the GOP's credibility on the economy which "trickled" down to Terrell. The first thing voters saw when they opened the paper on Saturday morning was the headline "Terrell-Landrieu Runoff Today" right next to the headline "Bush Axes Treasury Official Over Economy," which was a very poor political tandem for the Republican candidate. Why they did not fire O'Neill a day or week later, if only for political reasons indicates that someone was not minding the political store while handling White House personnel matters.

Bush's presence in Louisiana was also minimal. It was said that Air Force One would be parked in Louisiana for an entire month if Terrell or for that matter any Republican, forced Landrieu into a runoff. Though one could honestly say that the Louisiana sun never set on Air Force One it was because Bush was out of the state by 4 PM the single day he did devote to campaigning for Terrell.

President Bush's political itinerary in Louisiana was far short of what was expected. Bush had a morning rally in Shreveport and then jumped to New Orleans for a 1k per plate fundraiser in New Orleans, not making any other public appearance for Terrell in the state. Had Bush come back on Thursday to visit the vital Acadiana region or worked into his Tuesday trip a public rally in New Orleans, so those who can only afford a McDonald's Value Meal could see their president as well, his trip would have bore greater fruit. Instead Landrieu played off of it masterfully with her own "paper plate luncheon" while the Bush impact had eroded just in time for Election Day.

My guess is that either the White House has retreated to their 2001 campaign bunker posture in the glow of the GOP's November 2002 success or that they made the same mistake from 2000 and assumed that the election was over before Election Day. Regardless of mentality, the strategies had the same end for both tracks.

However discounting all of the above, there is one event that played the most pivotal role in determining the election for Landrieu and had it gone differently, Suzie Terrell would have given a significantly different speech on Saturday evening.

Fifth District Fallout

Because of the slightly expanded majority in the US House the 5th Congressional race did not seem to have national implications, even if it were to turn to the Democrats. It did, however, have a profound impact on the US Senate election and thus an indirect effect on national politics.

It was taken for granted, including by yours truly, that the congressional race in Monroe-Alexandria would be a lock for the Republican Party. Since redistricting took place in 1992, the area has had continual Republican representation in Congress and it is a fairly conservative rural area. Also the combined Republican vote in the primary was well above 60%. Not taken into consideration were intra party flare-ups that went on to alter the political landscape of both the US Senate and the 5th district elections.

The race had four major contenders: former Congressman Clyde Holloway, State Senator Robert Barham, political consultant and former Cooksey aide Lee Fletcher representing the Republicans and Democratic State Representative Rodney Alexander. With so many Republican candidates, it was obvious that the race would go to a second ballot and that Alexander would be assured of making a runoff at a minimum or even leading the field with a plurality. As things worked out, the latter happened with Alexander running first followed by Fletcher. It was within the realm of reality for two Republicans to have made the runoff had either Fletcher or Barham, who were both from the Monroe area, not run which would have been a GOP dream assuring the seat for the GOP and also depressing Democratic turnout.

But with Alexander pitted against Fletcher, arguably the weakest of the Republican candidates, the Dems smelled blood and their base was motivated. What was once conceded to be a safe Republican seat was now in play.

Fletcher had two problems that would deny him the fulfillment of every congressional staffer's fantasy: succeeding their boss in Congress. John Breaux, one of the most powerful and influential members of the US Senate, got his political start the same way back in 1972 and Fletcher was poised to become a Republican version.

Fletcher's first obstacle was his profile. Though a conservative whose philosophy mirrored the mindset of the district, being a thirtysomething political consultant is a hard sell in an area populated with small farmers. Or to put it another way, he was too "citified." Alexander played on this with his analogy that the election was between the blue bloods and blue jeans, with the Democrat sporting the denims. Alexander would have had a tougher time using such populist sound bytes against Barham and Holloway, both of whom have an agricultural background.

Second, there was the way Fletcher made the runoff. The politically professional Fletcher might not know what to do with a cow's teats but he did know how to win an election, the nice way or the not so nice way. The young up and comer's "by any means necessary" approach in the primary was to backfire in the runoff. When Fletcher nosed out Holloway for a runoff spot, the former congressman fired back that Fletcher had used questionable tactics to make the second ballot and hammered him in the press as "dangerous." Though Holloway did not endorse Alexander, he really did not have to with his silence on how he intended to vote being as deafening if not plainly obvious. Barham, who finished fourth, joined Holloway in refusing to back Fletcher.

The ill will was so great that both Barham and Holloway refused to have anything to do with Fletcher's campaign which was now joined at the hip by Terrell. The forced political marriage would bode badly for Terrell who was denied support from Holloway and Barham partisans who would not do anything for Terrell if it also helped Fletcher. Rather than try to work out an arrangement where a separate operation could have been set up for the benefit of the disgruntled Holloway and Barham people, the Terrell and Fletcher campaigns hung together...literally!

Instead of being the beneficiary of a high Republican vote in conservative northeast Louisiana, Terrell, tied to Fletcher, fared poorly in a region that even David Duke carried in 1991. Fletcher's candidacy proved to be an albatross with the weight of an anvil around the neck of Terrell's campaign. Once again the lack of a united front would cost the GOP dearly in both elections.

Remains of the Day

Mary Landrieu has not been one of the more prominent members of the "club" since her election in 1996. As a Democrat with a relatively moderate voting record compared to some of her northeastern colleagues, she has found it politically pragmatic to keep her head low and her positions centrist in order to continue living in that big, beautiful mansion the RSCC spent so much time and money talking about in attack ads.

Landrieu has been voting to the right of her own political philosophy due to the close margin she was elected by in 1996. I would guess that since such moderate posturing did not pay off in 2002 in the form of a primary win, she is going to be more "authentic" in her future votes and will end her days as a closet liberal, which will increase her national exposure and her position in her party's establishment.

So long as she is a Landrieu she will always be held in suspect by 45% of the electorate that view her surname as synonymous with New Orleans liberalism. In fact her moderate facade probably hurt her with her base vote anyway. Since election time is going to be hell for her no matter how she votes, she might as well start wearing her "own clothes" instead of wearing John Breaux's. I would assume that there are a number of votes she cast that her heart told her to go one way while election worried aides advised her to go another.

Though I am certain she would have been just as happy being re-elected in November, the ordeal has made her more of a national figure because it was the only US Senate race still in play. That the once vulnerable incumbent was able to hang on against a full court press without the presence of any national Democratic figures has increased her political stock many times over.

There's a chance she might be considered for a leadership slot in the not too distant future and since she is not up for re-election till 2008, when the Democrats are most likely to make their most potent attempt to comeback to the White House, she has a lot of time to burn and can afford to go with the party on critical votes.

Though she lost, Suzie Terrell is not exactly yesterday's news. Because state elections are held in odd numbered years, she retains her office as Elections Commissioner through January of 2004. However, due to the fact that her position has been abolished, Terrell will have to make a decision sooner than later about the 2003 election since seeking to return to her current office is not an option.

With her 48.4% showing against Landrieu, Terrell has come the closest to ousting a sitting Louisiana US Senator in 70 years. Furthermore, Terrell has benefited from the exposure she received on the campaign trail. Though she had won statewide office in 1999, her race was a low key affair that did not attract much interest from the voters or attention from the media.

It is ironic that the Republican that had come the closest to being a US Senator is the much maligned Woody Jenkins, who Terrell defeated in 1999 for Elections Commissioner. Jenkins, who was the target of more than a few shots by Terrell in that race, supported her in the runoff against Landrieu.

Of even greater irony was the support Landrieu gave Terrell in the race against Landrieu's 1996 bete noire. It was a little less than three years ago that Landrieu was congratulating Terrell at her inauguration party not realizing that she would be unwittingly playing a role, albeit a small one, in creating her 2002 opponent.

Whether Landrieu's menacing post debate words about this being Terrell's last campaign become prophetic is up to Terrell. She would be one of the leading candidates for governor if she entered the race, especially with the Republican field being rather undeveloped at this point. With so many Democratic statewide officials planning on running for governor, there will be more than a few vacancies available for other state offices if she sets her sights lower. Winning a statewide race coming on the heels of losing one is not an unprecedented venture. Just ask the person that came in third place for governor in 1995, U.S. Senator Mary Landrieu.