Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee

To: Interested Parties

From: Executive Director Michael Sargeant and National Political Director Kurt Fritts

Date: 11/06/2014

Re: 2014 Election Summary

Overview

This was obviously a difficult year for Democrats throughout the country, and those running for state legislative office were no exception. At this time, it appears that we lost majorities in seven chambers.

However, the news isn’t all bad. The DLCC helped Democrats retain majorities in the Iowa Senate, Kentucky House and Maine House, each of which denies Republicans the ability to advance a conservative, right-wing agenda.

We also held other key chambers targeted by national Republicans (OR House, OR Senate, WA House, and possibly both chambers in Colorado). In fact, we gained seats in Oregon that will allow Democrats to move forward with a progressive agenda.

In addition, Democrats held supermajorities in states where Republicans won the gubernatorial elections (MD, IL, MA), and stayed even or picked up seats in chambers that are positioned well for future years (AZ, MT, NC). We also picked up a seat or two in many difficult red-state environments (ID, ND, SD, AK, UT , WY).

Finally, we are well positioned to easily gain majorities in a dozen chambers that will likely revert back to their Democratic leanings in a higher-turnout Presidential election year in 2016 (ME, NH, NY, MN, NM, NV, WA, PA, WI).

Although a disappointment overall, this election did provide numerous victories that position Democrats for success legislatively and in future election cycles.

National environment

At the outset of this cycle, we knew that the landscape would be tough for Democratic legislative candidates for a variety of reasons:

• Historical trends running against the Party that holds the Presidency during the second-term midterm election year
• Non-Presidential year turnout would present a significant challenge, particularly among Democratic base voters (young voters, people of color, single women)
• Maps gerrymandered in a significant number of states to ensure Republican advantages (PA, MI, NC, TX, FL, OH, WI, IN, MO, GA)
• Voter-suppression efforts taking effect in numerous states in order to present significant difficulties for Democratic constituency voters (NC, TX, OH, KS, ND)
  

As the campaign cycle progressed, it became clear that numerous other hurdles were tilting the landscape even further against Democratic state legislative candidates, including the lack of credible Democratic candidates in critical statewide races (NV, NM, AZ, IA, WV, AR, OH, MT).

In light of all of those obstacles, the DLCC’s effort positioned Democratic legislative caucuses as strongly as possible to withstand the eventual Republican wave:

• More funds raised (nearly $17 million) this cycle than ever before, and significantly more direct financial support of caucus programs
• Major early investment in building the Grassroots Victory Program in order to address concerns with turnout, comprising nearly 400 organizers placed in key legislative districts in 25 states around the country on June 1
• Monumental GOTV effort that relied up the GVP investments to deliver more than 2 million contacts in key legislative races in the last four days of the election
• High-quality training of caucus and campaign staff in order to ensure quality candidate recruitment, strong fundraising efforts, and professional campaigns

Election results
Chambers targeted by Republicans but protected by DLCC:

• Iowa Senate (26-24)
• Maine House (83-68)
• Kentucky House (54-46)
• Washington House (estimated 52-46)
• Oregon Senate (18-12)
• Oregon House (35-25)
• Colorado House (estimated 34-31)