This morning, Politico reported the lengths that House Democrats are going to “sell” ObamaCare. These include distributing a Pelosi-approved plan to sell it in their districts and asking President Obama and other cabinet officials for help in hosting events, such as town halls across the country.

Yet, it includes no specifics on where these town halls will be. Which members will be hosting these ObamaCare events?

The NRCC recently released polling in Democrat and Republican districts that prove how unpopular the law is with voters across the political spectrum.

Politico: Democrats’ 2014 strategy: Own Obamacare
“Last month, the National Republican Congressional Committee conducted a poll in Utah Rep. Jim Matheson’s suburban Salt Lake City and found that 72 percent wanting implementation of the law stopped or delayed. An NRCC survey in Illinois Rep. Brad Schneider’s suburban Chicago district showed 57 percent favoring stopping or delaying implementation.”

If their true strategy is to “Own ObamaCare” why can’t they name the members that will host these townhall events?

The post Questions for Pelosi appeared first on National Republican Congressional Committee.

Yahoo News: Embattled IRS part of House GOP attack ad campaign “A House Republican group is launching an ad campaign against four incumbent Democrats this week that aims to tie the lawmakers to the Internal Revenue Service, a government agency under scrutiny after officials admitted earlier this month to targeting conservative groups applying for nonprofit status. The National Republican Congressional Committee will dispatch trucks to drive around the districts of Democratic Reps. Ann Kirkpatrick and Ron Barber of Arizona, Collin Peterson of Minnesota and John Barrow of Georgia on Tuesday.”

The post How GOPers are attacking Dems on the IRS appeared first on National Republican Congressional Committee.

Learn more about the NRCC’S Red Zone and check out the Democrat scouting report’s at www.nrccredzone.com.

POLITICO: GOP draws Red Zone over 7 House Dem seats

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=AE16B59E-CF51-4F44-8D1C-F29EA37653CD

“Republicans want to make sure the most vulnerable Democrats they’ve failed to take out in the past don’t survive again next year. The National Republican Congressional Committee on Thursday will launch Red Zone, a program aimed at unseating seven elusive House Democratic incumbents who occupy conservative districts. The seven Democrats whom Red Zone will focus on are: John Barrow of Georgia, Jim Matheson of Utah, Ann Kirkpatrick and Ron Barber, both of Arizona, North Carolina’s Mike McIntyre, West Virginia’s Nick Rahall and Minnesota’s Collin Peterson. The goal for Republicans is to strengthen their 17-seat House majority. Each targeted Democrat resides in a district won by Republicans in the past three presidential elections. Of the seven, Barrow, Matheson and McIntyre stand out as perennial Republican targets. In 2012, Matheson, McIntyre and Barber each won by less than 1 percentage point.”

The post The 7 Democrats Who Will Ensure Nancy Pelosi Will Never Be Speaker Again Are In The Red Zone appeared first on National Republican Congressional Committee.

Living Under ObamaCare will catalog how the health care law’s overreaching and harmful policies are impacting Americans and their families. As we saw today in this National Journal piece below Republicans will continue to highlight House Democrats support for this unpopular program in our targeted races.

National Journal: Obamacare Is a Prescription for a Democratic Headache in 2014

“Republicans see fewer opportunities in the House, mostly because the Democrats who voted for it were mostly purged in 2010. Among the few survivors: Reps. Tim Bishop of New York and John Tierney of Massachusetts, as well as Reps. Carol Shea-Porter of New Hampshire and Ann Kirkpatrick of Arizona, who lost their reelection bids in 2010 but made comebacks in 2012. But officials at the National Republican Congressional Committee vow they will continue to litigate the issue. According to data provided by the committee, polling conducted by GOP firm OnMessage found that in 18 targeted districts—a collection of potential swing districts—54 percent of independents favor repealing ObamaCare. Even women who skew Democratic lean right on this issue, with 50 percent of them in the targeted districts favoring repeal.”

The post Living Under ObamaCare – new NRCC website appeared first on National Republican Congressional Committee.

Roll Call: Rothenberg: Is the House in Play? A District-by-District Assessment

“Democrats need to net 17 seats next year to reach a 218-seat majority in the House. Democratic operatives identify 30 House Republicans who won by less than 10 points last year and assert that the margin makes them vulnerable in 2014. But the GOP incumbents who won by less than 10 points didn’t start, or end, at the same place last cycle. For example, Republican Rep. Tom Latham of Iowa defeated another incumbent, Democrat Leonard L. Boswell, running in territory very different from the Republican’s district last decade. Because of that, Latham’s 8-point victory — in a district that President Barack Obama won by more than 4 points — is a sign of strength, not vulnerability….

“And while Democrats have opportunities, they also have seats that will need defending.

“At least 11 Democratic incumbents start off at risk: Arizona’s Ann Kirkpatrick and Ron Barber, California’s Raul Ruiz, Florida’s Patrick Murphy and Joe Garcia, Georgia’s John Barrow, Massachusetts’ John F. Tierney, New Hampshire’s Carol Shea-Porter, North Carolina’s Mike McIntyre, Texas’ Pete Gallego and Utah’s Jim Matheson. Seven of these Democrats sit in Romney districts, and strong GOP recruiting in a handful of additional districts could make more Democrat-held seats (Minnesota Rep. Collin C. Peterson’s is a good example) vulnerable. At this point in the cycle, Democrats probably need to put at least another two dozen additional districts into play — in addition to the ones I have cited above — and hold most of their own vulnerable seats to have a chance of netting 17 seats in the midterm elections. It’s a very tall order.”

 Wall Street Journal: Larry Sabato and Kyle Kondik: The Early Line on the 2014 Midterms

“Obama’s greatest setback to date has been the 2010 midterm elections. Gains that Republicans scored in the House and Senate still circumscribe his agenda. It is no surprise, then, that the Obama White House wants to achieve something no other president has ever done: Retake full control of Congress in a midterm… Yet as next year’s battle for Congress begins to intensify, the odds favor the Republicans holding the House and getting yet another shot at the Senate.”

The post state of play in the house with a side of liberal madness appeared first on National Republican Congressional Committee.

 “This cycle, House Democrats’ success won’t be measured by the number of hours Obama devotes to large-dollar events and candidate arm-twisting, it will be measured by the degree to which Democrats can recruit and nourish candidates who culturally and ideologically fit their districts. Life’s not fair, and in order for Democrats to pick up House seats at all in 2014, they will have to learn how to fight on Republican terrain and play the terrible hand they’ve been dealt on the map, both as a result of Democrats’ urbanization and Republican redistricting… In most districts Democrats would need to win to get to an improbable, unprecedented 17 seat pickup, Democratic candidates will need to make their distance, not their proximity, to Obama’s positions on issues like guns and health care reform a selling point of their campaign…

“In 2012, Democrats’ haranguing of House Republicans as Medicare-menacing Tea Party extremists fell flat. After over $100 million in advertising by the DCCC and the allied House Majority PAC, seniors still gave Republican congressional candidates 55 percent of the vote, down only four points from the 59 percent 2010…

“By the same token, given unfriendly terrain and unhelpful turnout dynamics, Obama and Democrats would be lucky to simply retain the 201 seats they already have. And, there are signs the White House realizes that.”

Cook Political Report: Obama’s House Efforts: Game-Changer or Not?
http://cookpolitical.com/story/5489z

By David Wasserman

March 7, 2013

Much has been made of President Obama’s new-found motivation to help House Democrats regain the House in 2014. Last Saturday, the Washington Post wrote that Obama, unshackled from the burden of a reelection campaign yet “stymied” by a GOP House, “is taking the most specific steps of his administration in an attempt to ensure the election of a Democratic-controlled Congress in two years.” The article went on to quote DCCC Chair Rep. Steve Israel as saying, “To have a legacy in 2016, [Obama] will need a House majority in 2014, and that work has to start now.”

Democrats have been pitching this supposed B-12 shot to donors and members for weeks now. In a memo to his Democratic colleagues titled “Democrats are better positioned for 2014 than 2012 or 2010,” Israel noted that the “POTUS is all-in” for House Democrats and has agreed to early commitments that are “unprecedented and transformational,” including eight fundraising events in 2013 alone. The memo promised that “OFA’s ground game, which was a vital part of the Obama campaign’s success in 2012, will now be focused on Congress – energizing the critical ‘New American Electorate.’”

Yet if the White House is staking its entire legacy on winning back the House in 2014, it sure is sending mixed messages. Asked about Israel’s remarks on Monday, White House spokesman Jay Carney said, “It goes without saying the president wants those in his party to do well, but [2014] is not a focus of his, particularly at this point.” Furthermore, the president’s well-documented scheduling of dinners and non-eleventh hour sit-downs with congressional Republicans is an acknowledgment his last four years in office won’t be like his first two, when he could pass an agenda with Democratic votes alone.

In truth, Obama’s commitment to House recruitment and fundraising is welcome news for House Democrats, but it’s also a solution for the wrong problem. The reason Democrats lost 63 House seats in 2010 wasn’t that Obama appeared at two fundraisers for the DCCC instead of eight in 2009 (the DCCC actually outspent the NRCC during the 2010 cycle). It was that Democrats were greatly overexposed after winning a giant majority in 2008, and that seniors and others who never took kindly to the Obama agenda in the first place turned out in disproportionately high numbers.

Unfriendly Terrain

The ultimate problem for House Democrats in 2014 isn’t their own overexposure; it’s a lack of Republican exposure. Thanks to sorting, there are only 16 House Republicans sitting in districts Obama carried in 2012, including only six who sit in districts with Democratic PVI scores – seats that vote more Democratic at the presidential level than the national average. By contrast, in 2006, when Democrats needed 15 seats to take back the House, there were 24 Republicans sitting in districts with a Democratic PVI score, four times their level of exposure today.

No More Low-Hanging Fruit: Republicans in Democratic-Leaning Seats

This cycle, House Democrats’ success won’t be measured by the number of hours Obama devotes to large-dollar events and candidate arm-twisting, it will be measured by the degree to which Democrats can recruit and nourish candidates who culturally and ideologically fit their districts. Life’s not fair, and in order for Democrats to pick up House seats at all in 2014, they will have to learn how to fight on Republican terrain and play the terrible hand they’ve been dealt on the map, both as a result of Democrats’ urbanization and Republican redistricting.

Can Obama meaningfully help Democrats cajole fence-sitting, potentially appealing candidates into tough races against GOP incumbents behind the scenes? Absolutely. And it wouldn’t be the first time the president and the first family have gotten involved: First Lady Michelle Obama’s encouragement was instrumental in getting former NASA astronaut Jose Hernandez to run against GOP Rep. Jeff Denham (CA-10) in 2012. But as Hernandez’s race showed, there are also pitfalls associated with being portrayed as “Obama’s handpicked candidate” in marginal and conservative-leaning districts.

In most districts Democrats would need to win to get to an improbable, unprecedented 17 seat pickup (see our current list of races in the Likely Republican column), Democratic candidates will need to make their distance, not their proximity, to Obama’s positions on issues like guns and health care reform a selling point of their campaign. Many southern Democrats were able to do just that successfully in 2008, when Obama was on the ballot but his agenda wasn’t yet specific. But in many cases, they were also assisted by raw GOP primary scar tissue, something the DCCC can only cross its fingers for now.

Message Dilemma

Then there’s the issue of House Democrats’ message. In 2006, all kinds of Democrats gained seats in all kinds of districts because they didn’t all have to defend the same brand; all they had to do was beat up on a Republican president who was underwater in all but the reddest districts. In 2010, Republicans were able to run against Obama’s agenda on healthcare in energy in more than four dozen districts Obama had lost in 2008. Today, Obama’s brand is very defined – for better or worse, depending on the district – and most Democrats who sing a different tune will need to build their separate brand on their own.

In the rare instances presidents’ parties have gained House seats in midterm elections – and we’re talking only handfuls of seats – they’ve typically been able to cast the other side as bullies (see 1998 and impeachment) or obstructionists (see 2002). Can Democrats make the case that 2014 is similar to 1998, when congressional Republicans were pursuing a narrow, unpopular agenda? It’s too early to tell what will be on voters’ minds 20 months from now, but so far GOP-led debt trimming at the possible expense of keeping TSA agents on duty hasn’t captured the voting public’s attention like an Oval Office sex scandal.

In 2012, Democrats’ haranguing of House Republicans as Medicare-menacing Tea Party extremists fell flat. After over $100 million in advertising by the DCCC and the allied House Majority PAC, seniors still gave Republican congressional candidates 55 percent of the vote, down only four points from the 59 percent 2010. The numbers only proved that voters were chiefly focused on Obama and the state of the economy, and their low opinion of congressional Republicans in poll after poll reflected more of an apathy towards Congress than truly focused anger. What Obama and Democrats can do to change that is the real conundrum

Boom and Bust Turnout

Recruiting candidates who fit their districts and settling on a message that ratchets up independents’ anger towards Republicans still won’t solve another basic Democratic quandary: unlike in the 1990s, when voter allegiances at the congressional level didn’t vary much by age, seniors remain a much more Obama-averse group than millennials, and remain much more likely to vote in midterm election years. This means Democratic candidates will need to win even higher shares of the independent vote just to get back to where they were in 2012 – and 2012 left them 17 seats shy of a majority.

That’s where Democrats say OFA’s powerful list of “New American Electorate” voters will come in. Of course, we heard that before in 2010, when Democrats were desperate to mobilize the same group of young and minority voters that showed up at the polls the first time in 2008. It’s possible, even likely, that Obama’s organization has identified more of these voters and knows more about what motivates them than it did in 2008. But that doesn’t change the fundamental rule that presidential elections motivate casual voters in a way midterms never can. For Democrats, this is once again a question of mitigating fall-off.

In this “boom and bust” turnout era, perhaps the only good news for Democrats is for the 18 who escaped 2010 and 2012 and persist in seats with Republican PVI scores. For conservative Democrats like Reps. John Barrow (GA-12), Mike McIntyre (NC-07), and Jim Matheson (UT-04), a midterm turnout means a drop in straight-ticket voters and a proportional increase in longtime voters who know them on a more personal level, although Barrow in particular must be wary of a drop-off in African-American turnout should he forgo a Senate bid. Indeed, one perennial DCCC challenge is to simply get these members to keep running.

Bottom Line

Obama can certainly boost House Democrats’ recruitment and fundraising efforts in productive and meaningful ways, but his lack of dedication isn’t what cost Democrats in 2010 and 2012, nor can his added efforts alone get Democrats anywhere near the 17 seats they need to take back control. Because Democrats lost so many seats in 2010, they are highly unlikely to suffer mass casualties in 2014. By the same token, given unfriendly terrain and unhelpful turnout dynamics, Obama and Democrats would be lucky to simply retain the 201 seats they already have. And, there are signs the White House realizes that.

The post ICYMI – Cook Political Report: Obama’s House Efforts: Game-Changer or Not? appeared first on National Republican Congressional Committee.

FROM: ANDREA BOZEK, NRCC COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR

DATE: MARCH 5, 2013

SUBJECT: MORE SIGNS OF TROUBLE FOR HOUSE DEMOCRATS 

House Democrats started the year bragging about President Obama’s support for their effort to take back the majority, yet today the DCCC was forced to release a list of 26 vulnerable Democrat incumbents they are not even sure will return to Congress. In short: Democrats are having trouble simply defending the seats they already have.

Moreover, the list doesn’t even include two of the most vulnerable Democrats in the country – Nick Rahall (WV-03. R+14) and Collin Peterson (MN-07. R+6) – raising doubts over whether the two will even run for another term. Underscoring the difficultly that Democrats face, the DCCC is admitting they have to spend resources protecting incumbents that are in districts Obama won in 2012. A total of 19 out of these 26 Democrats are in districts Obama carried.

In response, the NRCC is on offense and capitalizing on these missteps. Today, the committee is targeting these 26 vulnerable Democrats with rapid response digital ads in their districts – letting voters know that even Democrats aren’t confident these members will be reelected. And just yesterday, we launched another aggressive digital campaign targeting 20 Democrat incumbents on Obama’s sequester with online banner ads.

This all comes on the heels of conflicting reports over whether President Obama is really all-in for House Democrats in 2014.          

It’s clear what’s happening: Obama’s never-ending campaign and pre-occupation with winning the House rather than focusing on the job at hand, is creating a public backlash. First there was the OFA pay to play scheme. Now, polling showing Americans would prefer the president do some work, rather than fly around the country campaigning.

And Democrats are now panicked – these aren’t the headlines they wanted…

3/5/2013: WALL STREET JOURNAL EDITORIAL: Obama’s Pelosi II Strategy. “The next time you hear Mr. Obama, House Democrats or one of their media acolytes talk about GOP ‘obstructionism,’ refer them to the Washington Post article that shows what they really intend for the current Congress. Bipartisan failure is their strategy.”

3/5/2013: POLITICO: Democrats launching plan for 2014 at-risk members. “The group of Democrats spans the party’s most vulnerable incumbents, with many residing in districts that narrowly favor one party or the other. Of the 26 incumbents in Frontline, 13 are in districts that favor Republicans, and 17 won in 2012 by less than 5 percentage points. Twenty-five are among the 34 Democrats The Cook Political Report has projected as the most at risk of losing in 2014. The vast majority of those in Frontline — 19 — are freshmen, a group of less established members that is traditionally among the most vulnerable in any election year.”

3/4/2013: MSNBC: Tom Brokaw Pounds Obama For Spending ‘Entirely Too Much Time’ Campaigning, Not Negotiating With GOP.

3/4/2013: POLITICO: Obama job approval tumbles. “His disapproval rating also jumped to its highest level since November, hitting 46 percent over the weekend, up from 40 percent a week earlier.”

3/3/2013: CNN: Electing House Dems ‘not a focus’ of Obama’s for now.

3/3/2013: WOLF BLITZER:  “The President’s now obsessed with 2014, getting a Democratic majority not only in the Senate which he had but in the House of Representatives.”

3/2/2013: WASHINGTON POST: Stymied by a GOP House, Obama looks ahead to 2014 to cement his legacy. “Obama, fresh off his November reelection, began almost at once executing plans to win back the House in 2014, which he and his advisers believe will be crucial to the outcome of his second term and to his legacy as president… Obama has committed to eight fundraisers for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee this year, compared with just two events in 2009… After delivering his election victory speech in November, Obama walked off the Chicago stage and made two phone calls related to his political plans — one to Israel and one to Rep. Nancy Pelosi (Calif.), the last Democratic House speaker.”

2/7/2013: WASHINGTON TIMES: President Obama vows to make Nancy Pelosi speaker of the House again

The post More Signs of Trouble for House Democrats appeared first on National Republican Congressional Committee.

Today, the NRCC is releasing a paid online ad highlighting President Obama’s and House Democrats role in the creating the sequester.  In the video, Democrat Leader Nancy Pelosi wins the “Most in Denial” Award, and Democrats Nick Rahall (WV-03) and John Barrow (GA-12) are also recognized for their award-winning roles in supporting President Obama’s sequester.

Click HERE to watch the ad. The ad which was released late last night has already received 33,380 views.

YAHOO: HOUSE REPUBLICANS HIT BACK ON SEQUESTRATION WITH ACADEMY AWARD-THEMED VIDEO. “In the final week before ‘the sequester’ takes effect—automatic, across-the-board spending reductions triggered if the White House and Congress fail to reach a budget deal by March 1 —Republicans and Democrats are doing what they can to ensure the other side takes the blame when the hammer falls. The National Republican Congressional Committee will release a paid online Web ad Monday that slams Democrats for not taking up GOP measures that would replace the sequester with more deliberate cuts.”

SCRIPT:

Announcer: Live from the nation’s capital, the winners from last night star-studded event

Nancy Pelosi… Most in denial. Nancy Pelosi Clip: It’s almost a false argument to say we have a spending problem.

Democrat Senator Max Baucus… Most honest about Obama’s Sequester. Senator Baucus Clip: “The White House recommended it, frankly.”

For creating the Sequester, the award for worst idea goes to President Barack Obama himself.

And for their award-winning roles in Obama’s Sequester: John Barrow, Nick Rahall, and other liberal Democrats.

Upon learning of this achievement, President Obama said, President Obama Clip: I receive this honor with deep gratitude and great humility.

Announcer: Help fight the Obama sequester. Go to NRCC.org.

The post and the winner is… appeared first on National Republican Congressional Committee.

Whether it’s the Arab Spring, ATMs, or, of course, “headwinds,” President Obama is known for putting blame on anything and everything he can in order to escape taking responsibility for his failed economic policies. Here are the top ten reasons why his budget is late. Want to see more? Check out…. #ObamaBudgetExcuses. Also we are asking self-proclaimed “small business” Democrats if they will call on Obama to submit a budget.  RELEASE: NRCC Asks Self-Proclaimed “Small Business” Dems: How Often Was Your Budget Late?

 TOP TEN EXCUSES WHY PRESIDENT OBAMA’S BUDGET IS LATE

10. Harry Reid Said I Didn’t Need One

9. I Haven’t Recovered From Beyoncé’s Lip Syncing

8. Biden Said It Wasn’t A Big F***in Deal

7. Manti Te’o’s Girlfriend Had It

6. I Was Too Busy Minting A Trillion-Dollar Coin

5. I Thought “Somebody Else Made That Happen”

4. The Jobs Council Is Giving Me One The Next Time We Meet

3. It’s Bush’s Fault

2. I Forgot To Hit “Save” Before The Super Bowl Blackout

1. Bo Ate It

The post Top Ten #ObamaBudgetExcuses appeared first on National Republican Congressional Committee.

This is unprecedented: Members of Congress thanking specials interests and cutting a commercial for an outside group that they are barred from coordinating with.

On top of the fact most of these Members have criticized these types of groups in the past…

• Ami Bera in July 2012:  Outside Money Is “Corrosive To Politics” (Sacramento Bee, 7/22/2012)

• Kyrsten Sinema in January 2012: “I’ll Stand Up To The Powerful In Washington…”  (YouTube, 1/2/2012)

• Cheri Bustos In October 2012: “I’m An Independent Thinker…I Have No Intention Of Letting Washington Or Anybody Else Change Who I Am.” (The Quad-City Times, 10/14/12)
• Elizabeth Esty On Election Night: “We Proved…Connecticut Cannot Be Bought.” (Elizabeth Esty, Remarks, 11/6/12)

A far cry from their praise of Nancy Pelosi’s Super PAC today…

• Ami Bera:  “We Were Grateful When House Majority PAC Was Formed.” (YouTube, 1/29/13)
• Kyrsten Sinema: “If It Wasn’t For House Majority PAC, I Wouldn’t Be Here Today.”(YouTube, 1/29/13)
• Elizabeth Esty: “I Wouldn’t Be Here Today If It Weren’t For House Majority PAC.” (YouTube, 1/29/13)

NRCC COMMENT: “In Congress less than a month and these vulnerable Democrats are already chomping at the bit to thank the Washington special interest group that spent millions on Nancy Pelosi’s behalf to get them elected. I guess the apple doesn’t fall far from Nancy Pelosi’s money tree.” – NRCC spokeswoman Andrea Bozek 

The post As seen on TV…New House Dems Gone Washington appeared first on National Republican Congressional Committee.