She’s serving coffee to constituents and holding “listening sessions.”
A staunch conservative, she is criticizing the president and having her photo taken with Democratic Rep. Mark Udall.
Bipartisanship has emerged as a favorite buzzword.
Welcome to the new Marilyn Musgrave.
Coming off a narrow election win in November and criticism that she wasn’t accessible to her constituents, the third-term Colorado congresswoman is undergoing a political makeover.
“I feel like I’ve worked hard for the past five years, but when you’re criticized for not being as in touch with your constituents as you should be, I need to respond with humility,” she said. “People criticize me for not doing things, and then when I prove them wrong and do them, they say, ‘She’s doing it because she had a close race.’ It’s a no-win situation.”
Perhaps, say political observers, but Musgrave’s makeover is a smart move considering Republicans are struggling to say afloat nationally, and a number of Democrats are showing interest in trying to topple her in next year’s election.
“It’s a clearly calculated, born-again political image,” said John Straayer, political-science professor at Colorado State University, which is in Musgrave’s 4th Congressional District.
So far Musgrave’s new image hasn’t translated into votes. During the current Congress, she’s voted with her party 96 percent of the time, according to a vote database on
That makes some sense, considering voter registration in her district is generally 40 percent Republican, 25 percent Democratic and 34 percent unaffiliated. And no Democrat has won the seat in 25 years.
But even with the Republican edge, Musgrave has had to fight off Democrats to keep her seat since first elected in 2002.
In her first re-election bid, she beat Democrat Stan Matsunaka by 6 percentage points. Last year, she beat Democrat Angie Paccione 46 percent to 43 percent, which was the lowest winning percentage of any member of Congress. Reform Party candidate Eric Eidsness pulled in 10 percent.
The November election has already led national Democrats to list Musgrave’s congressional seat as one of the most vulnerable in the country for 2008. Additionally, that election cost the National Republican Congressional Committee $1.7 million – much more than what most political analysts say should be required for a GOP incumbent in a GOP district.
If voter discontent with Republicans continues into next year, fundraising is likely to decrease and the congressional campaign arm of the party will have to make hard decisions on what candidates they are willing to defend, said Jennifer Duffy, managing editor of the nonpartisan Cook Political Report.
“The other question is, did voters use 2006 to vent their anger on Iraq and move on or, if not, do they believe the Democrats haven’t delivered? If either is true, Musgrave is on a more level playing field. If not, she may have problems,” Duffy said.
Julie Shutley, spokesman for the NRCC, said that the group was “very supportive” of Musgrave, but no financial decisions would be made until further into the election cycle.
In the meantime, Musgrave, whom many associate with a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage she introduced in the House four years ago, is focusing on bread-and-butter issues instead of social issues. And she’s working to paint herself as a bipartisan lawmaker willing to cross the aisle if it helps her constituents.
She has put out numerous press releases that say she “joins with Democrats” and has alerts called “Bi-Partisanship Works” about bipartisan actions in Congress.
Along with Democratic Rep. John Salazar, she has also introduced an amendment to a military spending bill that would prohibit the U.S. Defense Department from doing anything that might help expand Fort Carson’s Piñon Canyon Maneuver Site.
“Bipartisanship starts with discussions. We strategize together and find ways to cooperate,” Musgrave said.
Staff writer Karen Crummy can be reached at 303-954-1594 or kcrummy@denverpost.com.
