McCaskill's prolonged political decision seems familiar

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. -- Will she or won't she? Democratic State Auditor Claire McCaskill still won't say whether she will challenge Republican U.S. Senator Jim Talent in the 2006 elections.

But the longer she waits, the more political flashbacks she generates -- and the more pressure she undertakes.

McCaskill employed the same waiting game two years ago, ever-so-slowly giving more indications that she would challenge Democratic Gov. Bob Holden. By the time she officially announced her candidacy in October 2003, it was a foregone conclusion.

She had been conducting public opinion polls and raising money for months. She had assembled a basic campaign staff. She even had set up a catchy campaign telephone number. All the while McCaskill kept extending her timeline to make a public announcement -- a move that gave her the flexibility to back out had there been a sudden political or personal change.

McCaskill carefully calculated her gubernatorial bid, overcoming resistance from Democratic Party officials to become the first Missourian to unseat an incumbent governor in a party primary. Ultimately, McCaskill lost the general election to Republican Matt Blunt.

It appears as though Democratic officials initiated McCaskill's latest consideration for higher office. Yet the same pattern is starting to emerge.

As recently as April, McCaskill's spokesman insisted she intended to seek re-election as auditor in 2006. But Democratic insiders continued to court her.

Eventually, McCaskill said she was listening to them. She traveled to Washington in May to meet with Democratic leaders. A week ago, she traveled to Nantucket Island, Mass., for a meeting of prominent politicians organized by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

She has spent her evenings and weekends on the phone, consulting with leading national and state Democrats and people who have helped on her previous campaigns.

"Part of the process has been for her to talk to almost everybody in the world about what's going on," said McCaskill spokesman Glenn Campbell.

The result: The woman who once dismissed a Senate bid "is taking a very serious look at it," Campbell said last week.

The latest indication: A finance report released Friday showed McCaskill's auditor campaign raised a paltry $21,625 during the past three months, and had just $68,578 on hand. McCaskill can't transfer that money to a Senate campaign committee. So if she were running for Senate, there would be no reason to continue fund raising through her auditor campaign committee.

McCaskill essentially has suspended her fund raising, Campbell acknowledged.

Unlike her scenario two years ago -- when Democrats already had an incumbent for governor -- McCaskill is the Democrats' only top-flight politician publicly pondering the Senate race. That contributes to her pressure.

"The longer she waits, the worse it is for the Democrats," said political scientist George Connor, of Southwest Missouri State University. "In the end, she could say no, and then they're stuck without a viable candidate."

And that's why each passing day makes it more likely that McCaskill will run.

"Assuming that she knows the longer she waits the worse it is for the party if she says no, then the longer she waits is an indication that she is seriously considering doing it," Connor added.

Yet McCaskill doesn't want to repeat the Democrats' recent senatorial fate.

Like McCaskill, State Treasurer Nancy Farmer insisted in spring 2003 that she was seeking re-election, not challenging Republican Sen. Kit Bond. Yet as other Democrats, including McCaskill, turned down the chance, party officials stepped up the recruitment pressure on Farmer. On July 25, 2003, Farmer finally announced she was running for Senate.

The gobs of national money and support never materialized, and Farmer was soundly defeated by Bond. Now Farmer's out of a political job and has faded from the public eye.

McCaskill faces a similar all-or-nothing proposition. Win, and she's in the Senate. Lose, and she's out of office altogether, because she can't run for both senator and auditor at the same time.

Personally, staying at home may seem less unsettling for McCaskill than going to Washington. A Senate campaign would have to begin during her son's senior year in high school. Should she win, McCaskill would be in Washington while her two daughters go through junior and senior high.

"What's good for my family is the most important factor," McCaskill said in a recent interview describing her decision-making process. After that: "What's the right thing to do for the things I believe in and the party? Then after that: Is it a race I'm prepared to make right now? And somewhere after that are: What are my chances of prevailing in the race, and how would it feel to not be in public service anymore?"

Speaking generally, McCaskill said, "I have a very supportive family."

Is that another indication McCaskill is leaning toward a Senate run?

McCaskill said in late June that she would announce a decision within weeks. Now she's saying to expect something by Labor Day. And the pressure keeps mounting.

---

EDITOR'S NOTE: Capitol Correspondent David A. Lieb covers Missouri government and politics for The Associated Press.