Because the U.S. Census shows it has a lower percentage of population relative to other states, Massachusetts is one of the states losing a U.S. House seat during its redistricting process this year. But before Bay State cartographers can put pen to paper, they have to solve a simple math problem: what to do with 10 members who want 9 seats?
According to Roll Call, the Democratic Party may be expected to dust off its Joe Sestak file on how (not) to coax a candidate into swapping a campaign for a cushy administration job. Here’s what one operative had to say about a potential match-up of Democratic incumbents:
“I think that’s unlikely to happen unless there’s some decision made at a higher level that such should be the case,” said Philip Johnston, former chairman of the Massachusetts Democratic Party, who also suggested national party leaders would have to find a soft landing for either of those Members, such as an ambassadorship, in order for them to willingly leave their seats.
If you were a voter, would you want to be represented by someone who’s willing to be bought into retirement instead of fighting for reelection? Besides, how long would an ambassadorship last if President Barack Obama gets beat in 18 months? As most of the Massachusetts Democratic Congressional delegation knows, winning a seat in Congress virtually assures one of lifetime tenure.
Trading a long-term job for a short-term payoff isn’t a graceful exit. It’s an explicit admission that representing a constituency isn’t worth the price of fighting a competitive campaign.
CFIF on Twitter
CFIF on YouTube