For a while now, I've been wondering why no one is talking about the Senate race in Oklahoma (yes really, Oklahoma). In fact, I've been wondering long enough that I wrote an article about the Democrat in the race, Andrew Rice, for In These Times a few months ago. Now, Washington Post campaign guru Chris Cillizza highlights a new poll showing the race in single-digits after a month of advertising by Rice.
So far, Rice's ads are gauzy positive spots, aimed at boosting his name ID and positive perceptions. When I spoke with Rice in March, he also seemed very optimistic about the possibility of using incumbent James Inhofe's egregious environmental record against him, though that may have changed in the last few months. And, while Inhofe will presumably continue to enjoy a big lead in fundraising, (being the most vocal denier of global warming in the Senate helps to open up those oil-industry pocketbooks) the DSCC's big cash advantage over the NRSC and the low cost of media in the state could make this a good fight.
What's more, Inhofe is one of the most radical right-wingers in Congress. What Jesse Helms was to race relations, Inhofe is to the environment. When I was working on the article I asked Tim Greeff, deputy legislative director at the League of Conservation Voters, what Congress would be like without Inhofe -- his response:"Xanadu." What's more, if Rice makes the environment a big part of his campaign -- not a crazy idea in a time when Oklahoma farmers are facing sudden droughts and ice storms and both John McCain and Barack Obama are touting their alternative-energy plans -- a defeat for Inhofe would put the fear of god (or Gaia?) into other conservative opponents of addressing climate change (read the ITT piece for Rice's thoughts on how to successfully campaign on climate change).
--Sam Boyd
