i don'trial sclerosis, how to talk about this to get attention from policymakers who do not seem to care about making it work better. up in the situations where the hope is that a contractor is going to do a better job. and they are fast. you are sitting in a federal agency and you want somebody on board tomorrow, where do you go? you do not go to your human capital people and post a job and wait 120 days for it to be filled when he gets posted. you will go to a contractor. at, fast.idiq, if you want to get rid of an employee, how can you get rid of one fast? call the contractor, say i don't want this person around. and they are out by the end of the day. contractors are not always the

answer, but we have that big mission, how many contractors do we need to deliver that mission? we have got 6 million to 7.5 is a large workforce of contractors who help run the federal government, or deliver the services for the federal government. the goods and so forth. we need them, we have to have them, nobody wants to change. we don't want to give up anything and we are satisfied with duplication and overlap in government. we are satisfied with the difficulties in hiring and operating our agencies, we take that for granted. we have got to have these contractors. we have to oversee them. i would be glad to talk about this, i am pretty frustrated about it. i don't how we get congress and the president to pay attention to this. despite president obama's promise, he did not do it.

it is hard work to take the engine out of a car and grind it down and repair it. it is hard work, it is boring work. that not the kind of thing gets you elected. president obama's own campaign people argued a couple weeks ago that this issue of improving government management did not cost them a vote in 2012. that is right. but the fact that obama's people are saying it does not really matter to the electorate does not justify the lack of attention. the president is responsible under the constitution for executing every law faithfully. that means pulling a government that works. a government that works. president obama could have a wonderful achievement if he would pay attention over the next two years to the reform of

the federal bureaucratic system. boring, absolutely. important, absolutely. it would be a real legacy if he did. host: paul light

>> well, let me just give you all an overview of the briefings

we've done and to the degree i know we're going to do. prior to this trip, secretary kerry had two briefings with senate leadership on the negotiations. he's briefing the committee tomorrow in a closed session. he's. updating members of congress by phone while he traveled. this includes, but is certainly not limited to because calls are ongoing, and as you know, he spent 29 # years in the senate and believes consolation with congress is a vitally important aspect of policymaking, but he spoke with senators graham, levin, and reid over the last week. he made calls over the course of the weekend. under secretary sherman gave three briefings on the hill to house and senate leadership as well as with the chairs and ranking members of the committees, and later this week, she'll give another update to committee leadership as well.

we are very closely engaged with congress. the consolations continue. in terms of the question on sanctions, the secretary, the secretary will be clear that putting new sanctions in place would be a mistake while we are still determining if there's a diplomatic task forward. what we're asking for right now is a temporary pause in sanctions. we are not taking away sanctions, but we are not rolling them back. this is ensuring the strategy and negotiating strategy run hand and hand. >> when would the chairman and johnson said they would like to see sanctions imposed? >> he's consulting and briefing a range of members, and that will continue as part of the briefing tomorrow, but also in phone calls throughout the week.

>> next week or further down as long as diplomacy is pursued? g well, again, the overarching goal of the associating strategy and our legislative strategy run hand-in-hand, it would be, for that length of time. of course, we are hopeful to continue to narrow the gaps. i don't have any prediction of the negotiations in the meetings next week, but it will be a pause with that goal in mind. >> next, a preview of the 2014 midterm elections and what may infliewps -- influence them. editor of the cook political report gives predictions about next year's house and senate races. "the national journal" hosted this in the museum in washington, d.c..

[applause] >> thank you very much for that introduction. the thing is since there's an association with national journal for 15 years, and somewhere, well for 13, must have been two years that stuck at some point along the way. [laughter] sorry about that. anyway, it's great to see all of you again, and these are fun. greg and i go back upward of 25 years, a good, good, good dear friend, and technology does so many wonderful things, but we've really enjoyed this association. the report will turn 30 years old next year, but we've had 15 of the years in a partnership with national journal, and back in the first few years, i was the cook political report from opening the mail and depositing the checks, everything in

between, but now we've got a terrific six person team, and there was a time i could have given a cogent or faked a cogent analysis of every competitive house race in the country and every senate governor's race. that time's a little past now. we've moved to a model with specialization. what you're going to hear later on is the expert's excerpt. jennifer worked with us since 1988 -- well, there's a year -- like a year gap back from the early 1990s, but she's seen every senate race, every senate seat come through, cycle after cycle after cycle and has an institutional knowledge on senate races that i don't think anybody else else has, and david who you'll meet in a minute, our

house editor, came with us back in 2007, and i will tell a story about david. he was -- i used to have this routine that i would give in talks and, again, this was in the late 1990s or early 2000s where in terms of white voting patterns that you could sort of as a tipoff of whether an area is likely to vote democratic or not was the proximity -- concentration of or proximity to starbucks locations versus walmart locations, you know? it was catchy. both before they were both ubiquitous, and i got an e-mail one day that said he had a student heard i said that and did a paper where he plotted out every walmart and every

starbuck's location in virginia. this is down at uva. low and behold, it was dead on. i said, well, tell him, you know, if he wants app internship, let me know, and he came up with us one summer, and as soon as amy walter left to take todd's job when they left the hot line to go to nbc, we brought david to take amy's spot, and she came back to help out with the national stuff, ma crow stuff with me, and we have two other abledded people here, ashson barry and lauren fulton, so, yeah, i had a brief rick perry moment, but anyway, getting down to it. laying out the macro, and then jennifer will be first, david second, and we'll have a conversation, a little conversation about the senate and the house.

as suggested, i came up a year early this year, and i was trying to think, okay, what is this election going to be about? i came up with two theories, and the interesting thing about the theories is they are good for 2014, but probably also a useful way of framing off where the two parties will be in 2016. that is number one. will the republican brand, will republicans be able to fix their brand image and very specific problems they have with minority voters, young voters, women voters, self-described moderates, or will self-describedded programs flow into 20 # 14, obviously, a bad year for republicans? the flip side is second term fatigue. from history, we know it's almost inevitable that second

terms don't go well for presidents, they incur real, real problems, and which is one reason why in five out of the six second term presidents since the end of world war ii, party in the white house was hammered either in the house, senate, or both in the second midterm election. the one exception is 1998. bill clinton's second midterm election with a backlash of impeachment prevented that from happening. five years, five times out of six, the party in the white house was not able to win a third term, one exception was 1988 at the end of eight years of president bush when george h. w. bush wins. will the problems continue? well, look where we are on each of those. in terms of the republican brand, i think it's safe to say that there's been no improvement whatsoever in the republican brand since the 2012 election.

that we're seeing the republican's party infavorable ratings in gallop and other pollings in historic highs. i can't imagine why there would be any improvement in problems with minority voters, for example. the senate got a bill through, but it seems to be pretty dead in the house. it was controlled by republicans, and there's just some very specific reasons why republicans are having problems with latino voters, asia voters, african-american voters, and there doesn't seem to be improvement there. same thick with women voters, young voters, self-described moderates, and the government shutdown, generally, you know, certainly fault on both sides, but most people tend to fault republicans more than democrats on that, so no improvement whatsoever on that side. go over to the democratic side, and we're looking at just a

classic case of second term fatigue. as of now president obama's job approval ratings, poll as of yesterday, was 41% -- actually, it was 40%, exactly where president george w. bush was at this point when he had iraq weighing down heavily on him, and well behind bill clinton's 58% and reagan's 63%. we've seen the president drop roughly speaking a point a month since the election, and it's normal problems. when a president comes in, there's app energy -- there's a curiosity on the part of the public. there's an energy, a passion, a momentum, lots of new ideas, excitement, all of these things are sort of surrounding a brand new president, but as you go into year one, year two, year

three, year four, the reelection, after that point, they start really waning. years five and six usually are not good, and seven and eight are worse. that's -- and that's sort of what we're seeing right now. part is bad things happen to presidents in their second terms whether they are unpopular wars, scandals, or economic down turns or chickens roosting decisions from the first term sort of flowing coming back biting them on the rear end in the second term. you know, all of these things have a way of happening in second terms, and we are watching that. i think in the chickens coming home to roost, the debacle of the rollout of health care certainly of affordable care act certainly fits well into that, and so basically if you say

what's the worst fear that each side has looking forward to 2014? i think both parties are seeing it. now, you say, well, what happens then? i think what that means is that there is sort of this muddle that's there, and that while, yes, we've been seeing more and more wave elections. you know, it used to be that, oh, you'd have a wave election maybe once every four elections something like that, one out of four or five. you know, in those elections it's sort of when the all politics is local doesn't apply, and we're, you know, the tip -- all politics is local, what i call micro elections, you know, those are ones where each individual house and senate race is sort of stove piped, and largely independent of all of others, and, you know, you know, what's the population and voting history of that state and district. you know, who are the candidates, what are the

campaigns, what are the indigenous local issues? how much money they have, all of these things, each one's independent, and that's what happens -- that is sort of the norm, but what are we seeing recently? 2006, 2008, democratic waive elections, 2010, republican wave elections. increasingly we are more parliamentary as a country, and i'm not ready to say that's the new norm, but it's less of an exception than it used to be and more of a pattern. if you have what we have today, this muddle with both sides -- in fact, there was a democratic pollster saying last week that voters want to punish republicans, but they don't want to reward democrats. i thought that was a very, very good way of saying it. they are mad. don't get me wrong, the democratic parties favor up favor m --

favorable rates, they were lousy before the president's approval ratings took a nose dive. it's just that the republicans' is worst. that's where we are leading into this election. into this election. it really is a jump ball. i know a lot of people were saying a month and half ago and i heard journalist saying the house is in play. well the thing is most of the journalist i her saying that wouldn't know a congressional district if it bit them in the ass -- that being a political science term. and they were making this stuff up. it feels like it. well you know the thing is david is going to walk through all of the dynamics of why maybe that is not as true as it may seem to be. even stipulating the republicans

had time that did damage to their brand. and so that you know, and to me, i am treading carefully and not edging into the david's area too much, but for a wave to occur, an anti-republican wave to occur, i think it would require things that have not yet happen. maybe another shutdown or near default or something closer than 13 months before the election as the last one was. because all of these things have sell dates in every event. and there is a period of time that it starts to wane and only truly extrodinary events like

9-11 are ones that had the potentency to last over a year. i think a lot of people jumped the gun back then in terms of whether there is a wave out there or not. i certainly don't see it. could there be one? absolutely. and to tread carefully on jennifer's turf, when you look at the footprint of the where the big senate races are they are in states that any anti-republican dominant standpoint that is out there will be in places they matter the least. in the six states i personally

think are most likely to determine the outcome of the senate in terms of majority, mitt romney carried all six and that is a low bar. you look at that and say there is not quite much in the way probably. but we are seeing things like this is the recruiting period that is almost over. we were meeting with the republican senatorial committee. but the house season isn't over. so if you want to say something for democrats you could say things look good now and this is the time where people decide to

run. the democrats need to recruit more high quality candidates in competitive seat. and retirement is the other one. and tim griffin retired and another one in new jersey and both of those are competitive district. we would need to see more retirements in seats held by republicans. so are we there yet ? probably not. there is my 30,000 feet overview and i don't want to go in further. jennifer, why don't you come up and i will throw her a broad open ended question and let her do her thing. but again, i don't want to thank you yet because we're not again. but anyway, let me move over

here. >> charlie, i am going to do a quick introduction. >> before joining the cook political report he she was the press secretary for the national republican committee. >> the reason for that was that back in my sorted past i had been working on the democratic side before i became an independent and capitalist. i found they had a remarkable young woman who looked at raced with an objective eye and good insight. so as soon as i was big enough to hire somebody else, jennifer came on board in 1988.

how about the nationals? no, i started to say that. let's say we all landed from mars and what is this about the senate elections next year and let's do broadly. >> in that description of how i came to work for you you forgot what you said when you hired me: i have to hire a republican and you are really not a good one. >> i wouldn't want a partisan. >> that was the point. you didn't want a partisan and didn't get one. so, let's see, mr. martian, we will not start with the basics of being a hundred members in

the senate. but in 2010 the republicans were able to get the majority. they were hobbled by candidates in place like colorado and nev d nevada. in 2012 the republicans were in the position to pick up the majority and only needed four seats. not a big reach. once again, they ended up with candidates that were, you know, les than attractive to all but the most conservitive photoevot. but what they were able to do with them is sort of infect other republican candidates by

association. whether heather wilson would have won the seat in new mexico is debatable. but i have to tell you i doubt she would have lost by as much as she did because republicans were able to turn her into another conservative republican. here we are in 2014, republicans are in the fight for the majority again. but their hill is steeper and the path is more narrow. they need six seats to do that. they have things in their favor and worker against them. 21 democrats and 14 republicans -- that is helpful. as charlie said, we consider 7 of their 21 seats in play.

and of those 7, six of them are in states that romney won by 14 points at least and as much as 27 points. north carolina romney won by two points. if you flip the map, you will find there is only one seat sitting in a state that oba obamaca obamacaobama carried. democrats have to defend open seats 5-to-2 over republicans. and montana, south dakota and virginia are states romney won. so the math is tilted toward

them in the open seats as well. and there is not a lot of places for democrats to expand the republican playing field. republican seats in red states very much so. we have three seats today we are tilting in republican favor. and that is in montana, west virginia and south dakota. democrats play a smart game and recruit wherever they can. and right now i think republicans are in the strong position in all three of those states. we have one toss up in arkansas and pryor didn't have a race and

there was no republican nominee. arizo arkansas has changed a lot. but they have a solid candidate and he has a great personal story and connects with voters. so i would say that is the one most in danger. we have five seats in a column called lean democrats. i am interested to know the general election opponent. there is a three-way opponent and for everything you hear about miller i don't think he is a big factor. i think it is between the lieutenant governor and a guy

name dan sullivan who left state government the make the race. the open seat in iowa and louisiana -- that state is more republican since last time she e was on the ballot. the seat in michigan is surprising. they have cleared the republican feel and she is going to face peters from the detroit area.nds going to have a race if republicans get the candidate they need to have the primary, but there is a clear front

runner with the speak of the house and tom tiller. i suspect three of the seats wi will end up in toss ups and whether the republicans can expand that field -- it something they are trying to do. but haven't succeeded yet. and you see democrats, only two of the target are realistic. mitch mcconnell is in the toss up and he is more than holding his own with the tea party. i wonder if any told matt what taking on mcconnell was going to be like.

he is his own best strategist. and in georgia there is another seat there. mitchell nun is great and spent much of her life riding the points of life which is a foundation she is well known. she seems to be a moderate. very strong fundraiser. republicans have a really crowded primary. georgia is a runoff state. the possibility of nominateing todd akin candidate is pretty substantial. as long as the republicans

nominate the right candidates they have a fighting chance. but the question is will they? what is working against the republicans? charlie talked about the brand and the problem with younger and women and minority voters. the other problem is the tea party still and where they are running primaries or where they are endorsing kaepernickecandidt the most electable. they have done this in louisiana and north carolina. i think this is going to be a particular problem in georgia and iowa. states are republicans should be competitive with the right candidate. i am seeing a different two party strategy. despite the promise of leaving

incumbants alone is happening but they are going after them in the red states. the three with the most to worry about is cochran and graham. the tea party can go in and nominate their own candidate and it will not matter in a general election. most of the time it won't matter. but if i am a democrat, i might be looking for candidates and in case lightning strikes it is something they have done in the past and i would not be surprised to say it again. where does it stand?

the majority is steep, but it is not impossible, i would put the chance of the republican getting the majority somewhere 20-30 percent. >> jennifer, before i ask any serious, enlighten us what the governor of alaska said? >> he came in about five seconds after reading the story and something that is important in alaska is whether you are from alaska. he has been there a while and we did he go to element school? sandy hook. he lived almost all of this

adult live in alaska and sullivan has been there ten years. and when asked about sullivan he said i have jars in my fridge that have been there longer than he has been there. which means i will take the comment i am not having lunch at sullivan's house. >> i thought that was fun. republicans, to win the majority in the senate, they need to knock off three democratic centers coming in. with michigan in the mix, it could be only two -- senators -- how many senate democrats have lost elections in the last decade? >> only three believe it or not. tom dashal, russ lincoln and

another one. they have a strong record of re-electing. and i believe republicans have lost 11 and not counting the ones knocked out in the primary. >> so you could say six out of the seven key senate races were in states that romney won. but with republicans needing to win two or three depending upon michigan they have to replicate or come close to replicating what has taken a decade to do. so that is why you would say with all of this exposure -- and at the beginning of the cycle i thought the chances of the

republicans taking the cycle were at least 40 percent and now i am in the same range of 25-30 percent and that is because you look at it and realize the challenge is greater. jennifer, if there is one more retirement in the senate where might it come? >> it might come in mississippi. zach hasn't said if he is going to run again. i have been told to watch the form bill conference committee. it is important to him and high he bumped pat roberts out of the ranking spot to have impact on what the bill looks like. and then he decides -- he has an announced opponent who has been

endorsed by the tea party. the theory is it might be easier to beat him in a primary than it might be for the opposite candidate to beat someone else in the race. >> if republicans had a bad night, pick up three seats, maybe? >> honestly if they have a bad night -- like a 2012 night? i see them netting one or two. >> and that would get them 46/47. if they had a great night what might it be? >> 51. they will get the majority. >> so the most likely scenario you would say is?

>> 3-4. >> 3 is 48 and 49. i would probably go 4-5. 48, 49, 50. if you were drawing a bell curve of probabilities in the senate. bad night is 47 or so. now in 60 words or less, 2016. in other words why is what happens here important in terms of senate control in 2016? >> you have to remember that in senate races what goes around comes around. in house races, the 2016 election cycle will be driven by the 2014 cycle and those were driven by redistricting.

2016 is driven by 2010. and 2010 was a good year for the republicans. so they will have disperoportioa disproportionate results. 2016 is a steep climb. >> 24-10 with 7 of the republican seats up in states that obama carried. >> this is the game because it is little better in 2018 but not

by a lot. we will do the q&a at the end. jennifer is back up in a couple minutes. thank you. [ applause ] >> i want to introduce david weserman. he has served for many stations and charlie i will turn it over to you and david. >> now, i should add to the introduction in junior high in new jersey your parents gave you a subscription to a political better that wasn't mine.

>> i asked for the cook report because i saw you and jaime walter on c-span. my parent called and decided to get me a description to governing magazine because of the cost of yours. i thought i had the the last laugh. >> how do you see the house right? >> i want to take later on as many questions on house races and rapid fires we can fit in so think of districts that might come to mind. in the house there are 236 republicans and democrat said

need 17 seats to get to the majority. that doesn't sound like a lot of seats but it is. democrats are up against three problems. first is history. the average second term midterm election in post world war ii era is an average lost of 29 seats. terrain is second. the house is sorted out after the wave elections we have had. 96 percent of democrats sit in districts that obama had and 94 republicans sit in houses that romney carried. so there are not seats that would shift the house. there are only five republicans sitting in districts that lean democratic by the pass two presidential election results. the third is turnout.

democrats have a problem in midterm elections that i call the bust generational gap. and in midterm election the proportion of voters is 10 percent higher. this has been true for a long term. but it was as consequential in party terms because democrats and republicans were getting even shares of the generation votes. but when democrats are performing 15 points better the 18-29 group. older voters show out for midterm and the democrats have to overcome that by somehow. namely getting the independent votes in house races.

these structural barriers have been problematic. 6.8 percent is the estimate of the total votes that democrats need above what republicans get to win the barest majority. democrats are clustered in urban areas so their votes are not spread. obama won 52 percent of the college votes but only 46% of the district and 22 percent of the 3100 counties. so this makes winning the house a tall order. and if democrats won the total house vote by 6.8 percent that would be quite a bit and perhaps put them in line for the

majority. during the shutdown we saw ballot polling that showed the democrats near that and republicans in the danger zone. it has come back to earth since the affordable care act neutralized the damage and both fell. there are two types of races. the first is democrats against republican incumbents. democrats are recruiting and having success in district that they left on the table in last year's election. and if you think about those districts where democrats didn't play in 2012. they have them running against lee terry now and in indiana's second district and new york's 23 district and michigan's 7th

district. so democrats are trying to compete where they failed to recruit top tier people in 2012. ask the other types of republicans we should keep an eye on are the republicans sitting in democratic seats. gary miller in california is one of the most watched. mike hoffman in colorado. david valejo in california. chris gibson in upstate new york. and then frank lobe in new jersey might be a bell whether

because he has survived ever bad election and democrats are never challenged but they are talking it now. democrats versus house republicans is the second. we have nine freshman democrats and one is a senior. the new epa regulations have problems in south virginia. third is open seats. and we need more republican retirements to say democrats have a sense of momentum. so far from the open seats where members of the house are running for higher house we have 17 of

them. and they are playgrounds for e ideaologlogy groups. 12 on the republican side and 5 on the democratic side. one on the democratic side we are watching and that is mike's district in maine's second. and john run's district in new jersey that just opened, new jersey's third and arkansas has a district retiring after two terms in the house. in the forth category of races we are paying attention to is incumbents in primaries. i think idaho with simpson face

ag faci facingthe challen the challenge. and then just finally special elections. and we have had three special elections brewing in the last several months. the first is in alabama's first district in mobile, alabama. which elected business mind stream people. but you had in that race bradley burn who was more of a button down chamber type of republican running against dean young who makes mitchell bachman look calm. dean young didn't have as much support from the conservative outside groups other will. bradley burn won the it by 53-47

percent and that is a sigh of relief for the chamber but we will see more. louisiana's fifth district we will see a republican runoff between two republicans next saturday. and in louisiana's fifth district this isn't a clear case of tea party versus establishment. the more conservative candidate is neal who has the backing of bobby jendle who isn't the most poplar. running against vance mccalli e mccallister whose backing in the race is not from anything political but more like the duck

dynesty. and in florida's 13th district, bill young just passed away and there is a special election on the 11 for that. the special election is in a county she doesn't live in, but she is regarded in the district and republicans are struggling to come up with a candidate who can go toe to toe with her. heading into next year, what are we talk about in terms of overall net gains and losses?

i think a minimal shift in the house if the election were being held next week. during the shutdown you could say democrats might earn 5-10 seats but i think we are back down to the spear where we are not sure democrats or republicans have a better chance of gaining seats, but there is going to be a minimal single digit gain either way. >> down to the florida special election bill mcbride was the democratic nominee against jeb bush in -- >> 2002. >> i think that is right. where it was a close race until a meet the press debate and mcbride was asked a question on

education funding he muffed and then the race opened back up. but it was a close race for a while. what is the other interesting think about alex sink? >> he is a great grand daughter of one of the original siamese twins. >> and grow up in a house in new york next door to him. one fairly serious question and then another very serious question and then we will open it up to everybody. alabama won and we have is the business community/establishment versus the tea party and far, far right of the party -- and

some people write burn won therefore the establishment won. and this is the first battle to me that will go on for a while. in next year, who is going to be the two, three four, tea party republican incumbents who might face a primary from the center? a more established business charity. >> is tea party versus establishment overblown? i think so. but there is going to be few races where is an essential. people ask who are the 25-30 republican incumbents that are

on the edge of being tossed out and i think we need to remember that most are not and that the ones that are become cautionary tales to discourage. in michigan's third district where justin is there, the grad rapids community is fed up and not comfortable with him winning the seat. and now they are getting behind brian ellis who is challenging him. in the detroit suburbs in thad mccotter's district we have

kelly who was the only person on the ballot whether the petition signatures were found to be forge. and she is facing dave trot and he is more in line with the crowd in suburban detroit. and michigan is going to be interesting to watch in august of 2014. >> let me ask jennifer to come up and i think there is going to be mick microphones floating around to ask questions.

>> >> let's go to the first question and who is the microphone person -- wait. it is coming. >> i wonder if you could talk about the economy and the outlook for the economy next year and how that might skew for or against republicans. and the second question is 2016 in the house, if the democrats narrow the margin a little bit, presidential turnout is there a chance they could retake the house in 2016 or is redistricting locked in that in 2016 there is not much a shot? >> i will take the first part and david you the second. on the first, the pivot point in

a midterm election is the president's party. and the notable exception was in 1998 with impeachment where that was the pivoting point. my hunch is that if the economy was still struggling or got worse but still struggling i think it would probably reflect more on the democrats in a negative way than it would hit the republicans. unless this downturn was triggered more by shutdown/default or something like that. the default setting is it would hurt the president's party unless the opposition party was seen as having initiating a triggering event that will do

it. and that is why i think if the election had been in november of this year it would have been affe affected by the shutdown. but 13 months is an along time. there wahas been talk about the virginia gubernatorial race. virginia is a classic swing state and that was punuatcuated looking at the state race and the attorney general's race was probably the best test of where virginia really is because you

didn't have a -- how should we say? a flawed candidate on either side. weird candidate on either side. that would be the straight up measure in where it was going into the yesterday a 17 vote margin. >> out of 2.2 million. >> and then there was a development -- >> missing voting machine in precinct 501 in richmond city. >> and what was the reference you made before the event? >> the jim wells county voting ballot box number 13. >> when lindin johnson was

elected to the senate there was an usual ballot in one county. if we are down to 17 votes or one voting machine that shows virginia very much is a swing state. next question. >> that is thinking a little bit far ahead. but i would say this: 2012 was a great turnout scenario for democrats all around. president obama boosted the minority share and even that couldn't get the democrats within 17 seats of retaking the house it would take something really extrodinaidinary to get the house.

89 percent of house republicans are white males when 35 percent of the electorate are white males. >> next question? go ahead. >> you mentioned david and gary miller and i am with soerp southern california public radio. immigration is playing a role, but i wonder how big a role it will play? you have people stepping out pushing their party to pick up the immigration reform. and gary took down all of the referen references from his website. and can you talk about the

california gop congressional races? >> david and i are going to hold up one or two hands or one hand -- what percent chance do you think there is going to be a vote on immigration in the house before this election? go! >> i don't think there is any chance. but on the california races, republicans have an shrinking turf in california where they can still win. miller has had to twist himself into a pretzpretzel. >> explain the circumstances of how a republican won that seat. >> the top two finishers on the

june primary ballot advance to the general election. miller and another were the top two

>> there is a question over here. >> hello, looking at the long game, we have been talking about a lot of folks that point to the gop, the more or less dominance is of the gubernatorial slot. what happens with the redistricting and can the democrats make it, or is that lock-in for 20 or 30 more years? >> please let me give an impressionistic answer and then let david give what will be a more thorough answer. when you have the first election after the districting, that is

the baseline. over the course of the decade there are population trends and some get more democratic and others get more republican. so the precision of redistricted can come undone gradually over a decade. you can argue about how much that happens where a district can be are off. probably not that much, but some why. and this includes two dozen 18, two dozen 20, it could be somewhat different than the partisan orientation. but that is just my impression over the years. >> the democrats cannot could not pick a worse year than 2010. because it really is a vicious cycle. if republicans when and we draw the line, then they are in great

shape for 2021. perhaps jennifer can talk about this. >> is interesting because i think that the year will be interesting is 2010, 25 open gubernatorial seats, republicans won a lot of votes, putting us up for a reelection in 2014, by 2018, the 24 or 25 open seats again. and this will be better when they draw this. you know, they need to be thinking about that cycle of the governors races. >> 83% will be on the ballot next year.

so in terms of who will be around in two 2021, it will be impacted by several between now and then. >> could you please comment on the implementation of the affordable care act? >> go ahead. we will let jennifer talk about it. >> it. >> okay, i'd like to tell you that last october i knew that we were not going to be able to keep the health care insurance that we like and what i found out ways with the district exchange that i remember calling to broker the next day saying, how could you let that happen. but anyway i think that there

are a lot of problems here, not just the website itself and the rollout, which draws a public relations failure, but i think that there's a huge confidence problem for the millions of people canceling their policies and a lot of these people end up with these policies and i think their problem is really trust. but the way to watch this, i have been watching this through the lens of a democratic incumbent, mary landrieu and others because since the beginning of the cycle i have wondered what blood pact they all signed to support it and mark prior is on tape is saying

that this is the best thing to happen arkansas. but now they are all searching for a lifeboat. including calling for an investigation. and it took him weeks to sign-up, he finally managed to do that very landrieu has introduced a bill to let some of these people keep their policies and if they are not seeing it, they are hearing it from their constituents. my feeling is that a fixed website won't solve the problems and as we get into 2014 through 2015, there will be some new problems like access. because they are putting lots of

people in the system that but they have not yet increased the capacity. and i think this will be a problem in urban areas. it's not going away anytime soon. >> with the winners obviously been people that have no insurance today or awful policies that will get something better, what is your impression -- your impression is that there could be a significant number of people with employer supplies of health insurance who may end up with policies that may be less generous or exchanges than what they had before? >> exactly. if you had a particularly rich plan, if you want to keep that plan, it will be tough if you don't want to pay for it

anymore. in the exchange does not let me shop and i'm not willing to do that quite yet. but what i have been told is that what we have we are not going to have next year. and it's either going to cost us more about the same, and i said what we have and it's most likely going to be hard with higher co-pays with less access to physicians and that will be part of the system. and we have a plan right now and the other thing is that i have been talking to people who work for large employers who have had their insurance changed as a result or who have had choices

of lands or put into one plan. so i think that this has greater ripples and people appreciate and people who thought they were going to be affected at all are finding impact. >> okay, there's one over here. >> okay, let's try to get a couple of more questions unless they were serving decaf over here. [laughter] >> hello, i'm wondering if you could talk to the impact of other government shutdowns and what lessons can we learn?

>> it will be under a john boehner's dead body. [laughter] >> many knew that this was a mistake. they just knew it. the leadership knew it, the experienced once knew it. many of those with skills to look at math knew it, and how many suits that the democrats have in the senate, they knew that and this includes those house members who didn't realize that. the question is how many of them see things differently than they did pre-shutdown.

and just from those statements, i'm not sure that that is that much more clued in than they were before and we will have to see. but for people saying why didn't the republican leadership.bat, it's because they couldn't. i would argue that speaker john boehner had brought to the floor , he would've been tossed out as the speaker and he basically had to wait until there was an equilibrium in terms of the number of people who set a shutdown was an awful idea where we are more worried about the impact on the economy than those that were more worried about a more conservative challenger and there's a lot more concerned

about that than there was for those that fear the result of a shutdown. and it wasn't until it reached that i think that speaker boehner could call for a vote. so speaker john boehner, kevin mccarthy, those guys on it. and some of the more exotic members -- i don't know if they've learned the lesson here in there is not out of some of them to suggest that they also have it. >> okay. >> hi, i am from the feminist majority and i would like you to speak to the gender gap and the negative growing impact on the republican party and members in congress and in the states as they continue to push issues

that really react negatively to women. >> okay, i think that the term gender gap was remembered back from president reagan's first term and initially i thought that it was sort of a half empty and half full -- it was that kind of thing. democrats have a problem with male voters? >> yes. >> however, two things have come to my attention. the first is that women live longer than the men do. and as a result they make up 53% of the electorate to 47% for men.

both obama and congressional democrats won by bigger margins among women than romney or congressional republicans said. and romney won by seven and obama won by 11. support republicans are talking about a smaller slice of the pie. so it just doesn't work for republicans. but i think that there will always be something of a gender gap because i think that if you were -- worried about stumbling into stereotypes, i think it was chris matthews who used to say that we have two parties in this country, a mom party and a dad party and the mom party is very

caring and nurturing. this includes education and nutrition and many said that fiscal responsibility -- and these gross stereotypes? of course they are. but the thing about it is if you're going to design a party specifically for the white male voters, it looks a lot like the republican party and if you were designing a party to look at -- looking after other voters, it would look like the democratic party. and so some of this is inherent and will be there no matter what. and i have to think that if republicans -- i don't think we need to liberal parties in this

country, but if they deemphasized and toned down and turn the volume down and lower the emphasis a little bed on the culture issues, i think they would have a chance to do a lot better. particularly as the millennial generation comes more in line. but they are on economic issues and they are very skeptical about the effectiveness of government. they are not pro-government like liberals, but in their life experience, government has not worked very well. they are more open to private sector solutions and other things than older voters. so you could look about at that and say that maybe republicans have a shot with these voters, which would be true except for one thing.

but the generation is also far more libertarian and libertarian -- those are the things that are keeping republicans from doing better among that millennial generation. some of it is a messaging in emphasis and volume. >> i don't disagree with anything he said. i just like to add that democrats have been very good at playing this card, reaching out to the women voters and looking at virginia, 16% of all have mentioned the word abortion. it probably doesn't sound like a lot, but it was over 5000 and there was a lot of radio. it's a effective strategy for

democrats in the swing states. it doesn't work so well in arkansas and louisiana. but you also see that republicans have a problem with women and especially with unmarried women. the other interesting thing is underperforming mitt romney among women. and that was one, democrats have really learned how to do this effectively motivate the vote and i expect to see more of a. >> one quick statistic is that there is a place in virginia where i can guarantee that can occasionally one over 90% of women and that contains where

kendra tonelli at 91.9% of the vote. and that set the precinct of ways is exactly the republicans problem as well. >> i believe there were several for terry mcauliffe. >> there is a surge for those 20, that's my guess. [laughter] >> last question. >> okay, there is one more back here. >> i am just curious. >> okay, go ahead. >> a big picture, you've seen a

lot of parties collapsed. now, do you think that maybe we're looking at a reasonable prospect that republicans are headed into collapse? >> i don't believe there is a real risk were either party collapsing. and whenever one party does really badly, it is inevitable that the other will overreach. they will get complacent and screw up and get taken back down a notch and it really is, there is a self correcting mechanism that is there. it takes some time for it to self correct. and to me the challenge is and i'm really enjoying about chris

christie running. i think he's kind of fun to watch. but the thing is tell me how a party that is seriously considered, michele bachmann, herman cain. newt gingrich, they move all the way over to chris christie in one single presidential election. and the only way -- whether it is chris christie or someone that's like a chris christie nominee, it would only be as if there is a crash and burn election in between for republicans where they get us out of their system and a moveon, and yet i think the odds of this being a crash and burn is pretty low because the democratic numbers are so bad. i don't see that happening.

but there is a history of 1964, he absolutely decimated and pops back up and democrats win four years later with jimmy carter. >> well, i wasn't going to use the year 1988. but 1972, george mcgovern, crash and burn, before goldwater, 68 nixon, 72 mcgovern and carter. in both cases there was a crash and burn election and the party went the opposite way and even if david said, losing the presidency twice in a row in the

democratic party shifting towards the middle. i think these things turn around and is a one term or two term -- i mean, it's inevitable that it happens because both parties have some terrific self-destructive tendencies. it will self-destruct although they can bounce back on the other side. >> on behalf of the three of us, we would like to thank you. we have had such a fun time today. >> thank you. we also want to thank you for making this event possible and thank you to our audience for joining us today. if you could please take a