The Suburban Agenda: Our Families, Our Communities, Our Commitment
Home About Us Press Releases In the News
Publication  

OFF TO THE RACES

 
 
Battle Of The 'Burbs
 
By Charlie Cook, with Cook Political Report Senior Editor Amy Walter contributing.

   While the suburban vote has become a political battleground in recent elections and comprised 50 percent of the vote in 2004, neither party can lay claim to "owning" it. Since 1992, the successful presidential candidate has won the suburban vote by an average of just 3.5 points.

     It wasn't always this way. From the 1960s through the 1980s, Republicans owned the suburban vote. From 1980 until 1988, for example, the Republican presidential nominee won, on average, 58 percent of the vote. But in 1992 and 1996, Bill Clinton cracked the code and Democrats made inroads, particularly in older, close-in suburbs, though Republicans continued their strength in the newer, outer suburbs and exurbs.

     Trying to get Republicans re-defined as the party best attuned to the interests of the suburban voter is Rep. Mark Kirk, R-Ill. Representing the North Shore suburbs of Chicago, Kirk, as co-chairman of the moderate Tuesday Group, knows a little something about the changing suburban vote. Kirk's district was once a Republican bastion, giving George H.W. Bush 62 percent of the vote in 1988. Today, it is one of the most Democratic districts in the country held by a Republican -- Kerry won the district with 53 percent of the vote.

     On Wednesday, Kirk and his 50-member Suburban Agenda Caucus will be rolling out an agenda shaped by polling data from a wide array of suburban districts. Forget immigration, lobbying or tax cuts. Taking a page from President Clinton's post-1994 playbook of bite-sized, poll-driven policy initiatives, the suburban caucus is promoting tax-free college savings plans, open space preservation and greater latitude for school officials to conduct background checks on teachers and coaches.

     None of these issues is particularly revolutionary. But given Congress' dismal approval ratings, it sure wouldn't hurt for Republican incumbents to have some positive -- and non-controversial -- successes to campaign on this fall. There's certainly not much else for Republicans to be bragging about these days, and anything to steer the debate away from less pleasant topics would be a help to them, particularly on things that average people are concerned about and that seem both plausible and achievable.

     Increasingly, the focus has been about what separates the inner suburbs from those farther away from the city. Think Starbucks vs. Wal-Mart and Prius vs. SUV. While inner suburbs like Kirk's have become Democratic territory, the exurbs are reliably Republican.

     Kirk wants to change that. He points out that the caucus spans the suburban spectrum, taking in members who represent both the inner suburbs as well as the fast-growing exurbs. And he believes the party can bring inner- and outer-suburban voters together under a policy umbrella that includes issues that both can agree on, such as health care and education.

     Kirk boasts that Suburban Caucus members range from the most conservative of the GOP conference, such as Rep. Pete Sessions of suburban Dallas and Rep. Tom Feeney of suburban Orlando, to two of its most liberal, Rep. Christopher Shays, who represents Connecticut's wealthy bedroom communities of New York City and Rep. Nancy Johnson, whose district takes in suburban communities in western Connecticut.

     This is smart politics on Kirk's part. The general perception is that suburban Republicans are all like Kirk -- moderates who represent increasingly marginal districts. What Kirk is trying to show is that with the exception of inner-city incumbents and those who represent heavily rural areas, most incumbents do -- or will eventually -- represent suburban voters. Districts that were farmland 10 or 20 years ago now host strip malls and traffic jams, while once primarily urban districts now include voters who worry about crabgrass.

     Still, most of the sponsors and co-sponsors of the nine bills presented by the Suburban Caucus are from those inner-suburban-type districts that President Bush either narrowly carried or lost. All but Kirk and Rep. John Campbell of California are top targets of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee this year, including Reps. Clay Shaw of Florida, Mike Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania and Deborah Pryce of Ohio.

     Noticeably, the agenda does not touch cultural or social issues -- the ones that most significantly divide the more socially liberal inner suburbanites from the more culturally conservative outer-suburban voters. Still, campaigns are going to continue to use wedge issues like abortion rights, gay marriage and stem-cell research to try to peel away voters in competitive suburban contests.

     The success of Kirk's caucus might also be determined by the results of the upcoming mid-term elections. Democrats can't win control of the House unless they beat a good number of these Suburban Caucus members.

     Of the 50 members, at least 18 are DCCC targets. If these incumbents, many of whom represent inner suburbs, do lose, it might cement the theory that the GOP should concentrate more on exurbs, while Democrats continue to target inner suburbs for votes.    By Charlie Cook, with Cook Political Report Senior Editor Amy Walter contributing.