Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

And the winner is....

Last week, we asked Fixistas to choose the House race they wanted to see get the full Fix treatment -- the first of a series of chances you will have in the coming months to vote on the contests we should cover more closely.

And, the winner is......:

Arizona's 8th district!

Democratic Rep. Gabrielle Giffords has held the southeastern Arizona seat since 2006 when she won an open seat race to replace retiring Rep. Jim Kolbe (R). In 2008, Giffords beat back Tim Bee, a state Senator touted as by national Republicans. She won easily 55 percent to 43 percent even as homestate Sen. John McCain carried the district by six points over President Obama.

Republicans are targeting the seat again 2010 with state Sen. Jonathan Paton expected to be the nominee although he currently faces a primary challenge from Iraq veteran Jesse Kelly.

The Cook Political Report currently rates the district as "lean Democrat" while the Rothenberg Report ranks it as "Democrat Favored".

We'll get cracking on a detailed look at the race immediately so stay tuned. And, don't forget to suggest nominees for future House races for us to spotlight in the comments section below.

By Chris Cillizza  |  March 1, 2010; 4:34 PM ET
Categories:  House  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Liberals, Conservatives and National Journal's Vote Ratings
Next: Perry, Hutchison face off in Texas primary


A maxim I heard long ago and have always remembered:

Youth thinks nothing of health and old age thinks of nothing else.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 2, 2010 2:27 AM | Report abuse


Beautifully written and obviously from your heart.

Posted by: 12BarBlues | March 2, 2010 2:24 AM | Report abuse

As long as the topic is healthcare .. my position is that medical care is too important to leave to the caprice and the vicissitudes of the marketplace.  We will all need it, many of us will need it more desperately than we have ever needed anything, and all of us will know people who do.  Some of us will lose those we love to medical problems that could have been solved with enough money.  Medical care has been and is at will be at the center of the most emotionally wrenching times of our lives.

So to those who say, "tough" and "deal with it" and all that, please, just go away.  Such heartlessness is horrible and loathesome.  Go find some other way to be shocking.
I wonder .. if liberals weren't so increasingly contemptuous of the failures and excesses of capitalism, would conservatives still revere it?  Is defending insurance companies anything more than defiance?  Are the stark failures of capitalism truly invisible to you, or is it just more hatred of liberals?

Because in the case of health care, capitalism has failed.  Failed utterliy, failed completely.  That free markets have produced the best healthcare in the world for the very rich cannot in any measure compensate for its failure to reach everyone, as it certainly could, and as it does where markets are not allowed to tread.

Many of you will lose those you love to cancer.  All of you will see your parents lose their vigor and descend into infirmity.  Some of you will bury your own children.  All of you will see people declining into death from ailments that could be relieved.  Or cured.  Most of you will care.  The others are sick.

It's a pity healthcare has falled right across the chasm of our end times struggle with ideology, it's a pity that it has to be "Obamacare" instead of what it should be: our very lives.

Posted by: Noacoler | March 2, 2010 2:09 AM | Report abuse


When I said "subsidies" I was not specific - I was referring to the formula which is hand-in-hand with the individual mandate.

I am not sure of the specifics - however it goes something like this - individuals with incomes under a certain level - maybe it's 40,000 have to buy health insurance.

However, they are limited to again - the numbers changed so I don't know what the numbers are now - something like 7% of their income.

So if someone has an income of 30K - they pay $2100 per year for their health insurance and the government picks up the rest.

Is that through Medicaid -

However, everyone I have spoken to thinks that is the public option - which is something else - creating a government-run insurance company which will actually provide insurance.

The numbers and the terms keep on changing - I keep on waiting for a final bill - or a bill that they will be working off of - to get the specifics down. Right now, the House version I guess is dead, so they are working off the Senate version.


Posted by: 37thand0street | March 1, 2010 11:18 PM | Report abuse

Where is the change?

Gibbs says Obama wants an 'Up-or-down vote' on health care reform.

Sure sounds like Buch circa 2005



Posted by: 37thand0street | March 1, 2010 9:42 PM | Report abuse

It is time for the democrats to finally tell Charlie Rangel it is time to go back to New York.

See Ya -


House Republicans will move again on Tuesday to strip Rep. Charlie Rangel of his chairmanship of the powerful Ways and Means Committee — and after last week’s admonishment of the veteran New York lawmaker by the House ethics committee, Republicans are confident that they will be pick up more Democratic votes.


Posted by: 37thand0street | March 1, 2010 9:20 PM | Report abuse





DINO !!!!


Posted by: 37thand0street | March 1, 2010 9:08 PM | Report abuse

obama learns from George Bush's mistakes. Vows not to pardon any more turkeys.

Posted by: SuzyCcup | March 1, 2010 8:31 PM | Report abuse

DDawd, thank you fro the link to Ezra Klein. I had missed that article and it was full of policy information, numbers and background. A superior column/

"To sum up, then, Ryan makes some good points about the true cost of the bill and realities of the federal budget. But he purposefully omits any mention of the bill's expected savings, disingenuously attaches the price tag of a broken Republican policy onto the health-care reform bill, and selectively stops extrapolating trends when they don't fit his points. It's a presentation designed to make the bill look less fiscally responsible than it really is."

Posted by: margaretmeyers | March 1, 2010 8:27 PM | Report abuse

Tommy Thompson is going to run in Wisconsin - so now Wisconsin is competitive.


Who would have thought that Indiana and Wisconsin would have been in play?


Posted by: 37thand0street | March 1, 2010 8:23 PM | Report abuse

Alan Frumin may become famous - but he reminds me of Al Frohman - the sausage king from Ferris Buller.

Al Frohman - after the movie - altered his name slightly and has now risen to become the Senate Parliamentarian.


Posted by: 37thand0street | March 1, 2010 7:35 PM | Report abuse

"Do you get a free trip to Arizona to interview voters in the 8th district and do some on-the-ground investigative reporting ???

Are there Indian tribes there???"

there are recognized tribes in all 50 states-- were you 'homeschooled' by any chance?

Posted by: drindl | March 1, 2010 7:17 PM | Report abuse

There really isn't a topic here to stay on, so let me post Ezra Klein's analysis of Paul Ryan's critique of the HCR bill.

Posted by: DDAWD | March 1, 2010 7:15 PM | Report abuse

You missed a candidate:

And in my opinion, the only conservative in the CD8 race.

Posted by: SouthernExposure | March 1, 2010 7:05 PM | Report abuse

OK, StreetCorner, I'll bite:

What do subsidies, which most certainly are in the SB, have to do with "single payer", which is not? Are you equating the payment of taxpayer dollars [or deficit financed dollars] to private insurers with the establishment of a national health insurer, which is most certainly not?

Or do you assume that subsidies will be paid through the Medicaid system? If the latter, I understand the attempted parallel, but I think it is not accurate.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | March 1, 2010 6:00 PM | Report abuse

The main problem with the health care bill is that people really don't know what's in it.

Sure, there are some talking points out there - people can mention 3 or 4 basic points.

However, they hear a 2000 page bill - and they really don't know what is in the bill - and curbing the abuses of the insurance company is NOT setting up a government program.

Peope do not understand the subsidies - they do not understand what that means in relation to the public option.

They STILL HAVEN'T WRITTEN A FINAL BILL - so no one still knows what the bill says - and they are lining up votes for a bill that isn't finalized - it is the MOST SLIPPERY THING I HAVE EVER HEARD OF. Why wouldn't anybody be in favor of this ????


Posted by: 37thand0street | March 1, 2010 5:43 PM | Report abuse

Chris - would love to see a detailed look at VA-05, and the likelihood of a 3rd party reemergence of Virgil Goode.

Posted by: erikpdumont | March 1, 2010 5:30 PM | Report abuse

another angry, crazy liberal. Our very own Ped perhaps?

If only had hooked up Amy Bishop with Bruce Ivins, aka Dr. Anthrax (mirror human for Ped), both might have been too busy gazing longingly into each other's glassy eyes to kill anybody. Via Smoking Gun, a profile in moonbattery:

After the Department of Justice last month formally closed its probe of the 2001 anthrax attacks, the FBI released the first batch of documents detailing the years-long investigation that ended with officials concluding that Bruce Ivins, a government scientist who committed suicide in July 2008, was responsible for the mailings that killed five victims. The records, released pursuant to Freedom of Information Act requests, portray Ivins as becoming increasingly unhinged as it became clear that he was the principal target of the FBI's "Amerithrax" probe.
[…Ivins] noted that agents searching his basement would find a "bag of material that he uses to 'cross-dress,'" according to an interview report. … Three months before his suicide, surveillance agents sifted through trash Ivins left at his curb and discovered that the beleaguered scientist was disposing of pornographic magazines, fetish titles, and 15 pairs of stained women's panties.
His political views were no less perverse:

In a July 2008 e-mail, Ivins wrote that "Dick Cheney scares me. The Patriot Act is so unconstitutional it's not even funny." He added, "I'm voting for Obama!"
But Ivins never cast that vote for Hopey Change, choosing to snuff himself that same month. Unfortunately for America, all too many others shared his point of view.

Posted by: drivl | March 1, 2010 5:19 PM | Report abuse


Do you get a free trip to Arizona to interview voters in the 8th district and do some on-the-ground investigative reporting ???

Are there Indian tribes there???

I remember reading about one Indian tribe which is on the border of Mexico - literally with part of the tribe on our side and part on the Mexican side - for some reason, they have the tribe members divided up so some are citizens here, some in Mexico

Then travel within the reservation is really crossing an international boundary.

I don't know if that Tribe is in the 8th - but maybe you can go to Arizona.


Posted by: 37thand0street | March 1, 2010 5:16 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company