Few business owners would make the claim that "fear, uncertainty and change are our three major food groups," but then again there are even fewer that would consider setting up shop in Washington, D.C., and staking their claim monitoring the anti-do-it-yourself world of national politics. Charlie Cook started the Cook Political Report in 1984 as a non-partisan newsletter handicapping every presidential, senatorial, congressional and gubernatorial race in the country with state-by-state and national trend analysis. The company has steadily grown to the point where 2004 will be its best year so far with over a million dollars in revenue, in part because of a diverse revenue stream, in part because of their renowned expertise, and in part because of Cook's old friends, "fear, uncertainty and change."
Over crabcakes, shrimp étouffée and Key Lime pie, Cook and managing editor/Senate expert Jennifer Duffy sat down with Patrick J. Sauer in Washington, D.C., at politico favorite The Palms to discuss the business of politics and what to expect come November 2nd.
Q: Was the Cook Political Report a natural outgrowth of a political junkie?
CC: Absolutely, as a freshman at Georgetown I used to go sit in on the Watergate hearings. The first paid job I ever had was as the Senate elevator operator. I met all the heavyweights, Bob Dole, Barry Goldwater, Hubert Humphrey, and got hooked. I've worked in a number of arenas including campaigns, committees, as a pollster and writing for Roll Call . It's all politics all the time around here; I read five or six newspapers a day. You have to love politics to do what we do with this much intensity.
JD: Politics is our sports. We can talk about it all day, and the season runs on a 24-month cycle.
Q: Tell me about the evolution of the Cook Political Report.
CC: I started it because there wasn't a single insiders view of elections, but since I had worked for J. Bennett Johnston (D-LA) I had to prove the newsletter would be non-partisan and not just a Democratic tip sheet. It was a struggle in the early days, a bare bones operation, at one point my sole contract was canceled right around when my first child was born. A governmental research company wanted to hire me and I agreed as long as I could continue the newsletter, so they bought it for a very low six-figure, much more than it was worth. Eventually, an international PR conglomerate acquired that company and it was a bad fit. I took to printing sketches that would say "Day 38 of Cook Behind Bars" and leaving them on the desk and under the windshield wipers of my boss, pleading to sell the company back to me. In 1991, the company wasn't meeting their earnings, so I was able to buy the Cook Political Group for a fraction. I've owned it outright ever sense. I was an entrepreneur, an acquisition an LBO and now a strategic alliance. I was the 1980s.
Q: Is the newsletter the bread and butter?
CC: It gives us credibility and establishes our expertise, but we have four revenue streams: the Cook Political Report with 800 paid subscribers at $295 a year; a contract to provide articles and appearances for National Journal ; a contract to provide analysis for NBC, and tons of speeches, which is where we make the bulk of our money. Our readers are primarily in the private sector, PACs, lobbyists, media outlets, trade associations, etc., who pay between $6-12,000 per speech. I've been in 30 states since January speaking to groups like the International Housewares Association or the Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies. I'm a ham so I like it, but by December every year I am tired of politics.
Q: Has it been smooth ever since you bought it back?
CC: Our business is interesting because even-numbered years are always going to be better, presidential years are the best, followed by mid-term elections and so on. The transition years in 1991-92 were great and so were the Clinton screw-ups in 1993-94 and then the tsunami wave with Newt & the Boys, which we called, although nobody could've predicted the magnitude. By 1996, we were rolling and I thought we would never have to look back again. I was appearing on Meet the Press and David Brinkley's show, and then in 1997 the phones stopped ringing. Around that time, though, Congress raised their pay but banned honoraria for speeches, so we started getting a lot more requests. It's been a boon for our business.
Q: Has it become a rite of passage for candidates to visit the Cook Political Report?
JD: We see just about everybody for at least an hour session, some come in comfortable, others are desperate. There was actually a memo from the DNC with the do's and don'ts when visiting us, but we want to help candidates put their best foot forward. If they can't tell me their life story quickly and concisely how are they going to be able to let the public know who they are?
CC: We don't care who wins and loses, we just want to be right.
JD: I know I've done my job when both sides are a little happy and a little pissy.
Q: Have you had candidates come in early on that you knew were meant for bigger things?
CC: In fifteen minutes it was apparent why trial lawyers would drive across North Carolina to watch John Edwards try a case.
JD: Barack Obama came in September of 2002 and he had a lot of talent, smarts and charisma. And from the first day I met Chuck Hegel I thought, "there's something about that guy." It's fun to see them hit the big time.
CC: You learn quickly that both Democrats and Republicans have people with good ideas and intentions and rarely is a party wholly on the side of truth, justice and the American way. For instance, years ago, Jessie Helms saw me, a stranger, walking out of the Capitol with my tie undone and coat over my shoulders and said "tough day?" He walked me out. Helms was a nice old man, a lightning rod I might not have agreed with on a lot of issues, but he was well-liked in the Chamber.
Q: Has technology changed the way Cook Political Group conducts business?
CC: We hadn't done any marketing in years, but we recently went all-electronic, so I think we will try to get wider distribution. In the old days, we were in the know, but now it's a lot easier for armchair analysts to keep tabs.