The congressman from the 8th District is Chris Van Hollen, first elected in 2002 and one of the House’s most influential Democrats. Wonky, self-assured, and telegenic, Van Hollen earned a prominent role in the Democratic House leadership after helping the party secure its majority in the chamber in 2006. He chaired the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in 2008 and 2010; The Washington Post dubbed him the party’s “Mr. Fix-It.” Read More

The congressman from the 8th District is Chris Van Hollen, first elected in 2002 and one of the House’s most influential Democrats. Wonky, self-assured, and telegenic, Van Hollen earned a prominent role in the Democratic House leadership after helping the party secure its majority in the chamber in 2006. He chaired the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in 2008 and 2010; The Washington Post dubbed him the party’s “Mr. Fix-It.”

The son of a Foreign Service officer, Van Hollen was born in Pakistan, and grew up around the globe, living in several countries including Sri Lanka, where his father was the U.S. ambassador. He graduated from Swarthmore College, and got a master’s degree from Harvard University and a law degree from Georgetown University. In the 1980s, he worked for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, where he co-authored a report on Iraq’s use of chemical weapons. In 1990, he was elected to the Maryland House of Delegates and in 1994 to the state Senate. In 2002, Van Hollen ran for the 8th District House seat held by liberal Republican Connie Morella since 1986. Maryland’s Democratic legislature had changed the district, removing affluent Republican precincts in Potomac and adding heavily Democratic territory to the east. Van Hollen’s chief opponent in the Democratic primary was state Del. Mark Shriver, son of Sargent and Eunice Shriver, who had extensive labor support. Bolstered by the endorsement of The Washington Post, Van Hollen defeated Shriver 43%-41%, with former trade official Ira Shapiro getting 13%.

Van Hollen then had only eight weeks to campaign against Morella, a hard-working and congenial Republican with a liberal voting record suited to the district’s many Democrats. Morella had voted against the Iraq war resolution and often opposed the conservative House GOP leadership. Van Hollen did not directly attack Morella, but argued that she was an enabler of the Republican majority, and that her vote to organize the House with Republicans kept in power conservatives who were out of sync with most district voters. Morella criticized Van Hollen’s record in Annapolis, including his decision to quit a Senate subcommittee over proposed budget cuts. The Post endorsed Morella, but it wasn’t enough. In a race in which the two candidates together spent nearly $6 million, Van Hollen won 52%-47%. Redistricting probably determined the result. Nearly half of Van Hollen’s popular vote margin came from the small part of the district in Prince George’s County, where he won 78%-21%.

In the House, Van Hollen won an early legislative victory when he got a majority, including 26 Republicans, to approve his amendment to limit a plan to outsource more federal jobs. In 2005, he was appointed by DCCC Chairman Rahm Emanuel of Illinois to manage candidate recruitment and execution of the committee’s “Red to Blue” campaign plan. Working closely with the hard-driving Emanuel, the low-key and genial Van Hollen traveled to many battleground districts for hands-on candidate mentoring.

When Democrats won a majority in 2006, Van Hollen was rewarded with a seat on the powerful Ways and Means Committee. He focused on revisions to the Alternative Minimum Tax, which threatened many of his affluent constituents, changes to make prescription drugs more affordable for low-income consumers, and legislation to curb speculation and market manipulation in oil markets. On other issues, he worked with Emanuel to require lobbyists to make additional disclosure of campaign contributions. He sought more money for the region’s Metro transit system and for initiatives to clean up the Chesapeake Bay.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi showed her confidence in Van Hollen by appointing him to head the DCCC after Emanuel stepped down. He worked closely with her on campaign strategy in both the 2008 and 2010 political seasons. Unlike Emanuel, he developed a harmonious relationship with Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean. His goal was to try to reverse historical forces that generally produced losses for a winning party after a wave election like the one in 2006. He helped Democrats win special elections in unlikely territory—downstate Illinois, Baton Rouge, Louisiana and northeast Mississippi. He ran a skillful in-house research operation and expanded the field program. He also performed well in the most important function for any DCCC chairman—raising money. The committee took in $176 million in the 2008 election cycle, compared with $118 million for its counterpart NRCC. Early and aggressive challenges to veteran members helped persuade 26 Republican incumbents not to seek re-election that year. Van Hollen successfully identified pickup possibilities in unlikely districts in Alabama and Idaho. Overall, Democrats gained 21 seats in November 2008, many in traditionally Republican areas, and Van Hollen and the DCCC got much of the credit. Only four freshman Democrats, all in Republican-leaning areas, were defeated out of a class of 33.

After his 2008 electoral success, Van Hollen contemplated a challenge to Caucus Chairman John Larson of Connecticut, a step up the leadership ladder. But Pelosi persuaded him to stay on as DCCC chairman for the 2010 election and also gave him a new leadership post, assistant to the speaker. He remained involved on substantive issues in the 111th Congress (2009-10). In April 2009, he introduced a cap-and-dividend bill, an alternative to the Democrats’ cap-and-trade legislation that would impose a carbon tax on coal, oil and gas producers and distribute the proceeds as dividends to citizens. He was concerned about the effect the stricter cap-and-trade bill would have on members in coal states. The energy bill ultimately died in the Senate. During another major debate, on the health care insurance market overhaul, Van Hollen co-sponsored a successful amendment allowing children up to age 26 to stay on their parents’ health insurance—a major talking point for Democrats defending the bill in the 2010 campaign. He also sponsored a similar provision for the Federal Employees Health Benefits Plan.

When the U.S. Supreme Court in January 2010 overturned many federal restrictions on corporate involvement in campaign advertising, Van Hollen introduced a bill providing for increased disclosure requirements for corporations. When the powerful National Rifle Association came out in opposition in May, he fashioned an amendment exempting the NRA. When the Congressional Black Caucus and many liberals objected, Van Hollen expanded the exemption to the Sierra Club, the Humane Society and AARP. The bill passed the House in June 219-206. Van Hollen also has a strong interest in foreign policy. In June 2009, he sponsored a successful amendment to a Pakistan aid bill with a provision providing for duty-free entry to goods produced in reconstruction zones in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

But much of Van Hollen’s time was necessarily spent on the DCCC’s mandate to hold or increase the Democratic majority in 2010. Sensing the national mood turning against incumbents, he said in February 2009 that his job was to “hold the line” and that there would be no “third wave.” He worked to give freshman Democrats the lead role on popular amendments. He identified 41 “endangered species” members and worked to give those with conservative districts leeway to vote against the leadership on the budget. Once again, he was successful in special elections, holding one seat in upstate New York and holding the late John Murtha’s seat in coal country Pennsylvania. But he was unable to bridge the deep schism in the Hawaii Democratic party, and the party lost Hawaii’s 1st District seat as a result.

His job grew increasingly difficult as poll results rolled in showing an increasing number of Democratic incumbents trailing little-known Republican challengers. In August 2010, he warned that Democrats were in for “a very tough campaign season.” He said, “We’re obviously working closely to protect those who did not prepare themselves.” He contributed $1.6 million of his own campaign money to others, but he admitted after the election that he had cut off nine incumbents who could not be saved from further DCCC funding, sending $12 million to districts where Democrats still had hopes of winning in the final days. Van Hollen told The New York Times, “Just on the triage side, we believe we saved 15-20 seats.” Even so, Democrats lost 63 seats—more than either party had lost since the 1948 election. “It was obviously a brutal night for Democrats,” Van Hollen told the Times.

With Democrats in the minority in 2011, Van Hollen was no longer assistant to the speaker and he told Pelosi he did not want another term as DCCC chairman. He instead got a plum committee assignment as the ranking Democrat on the Budget Committee, replacing John Spratt of South Carolina, who lost his seat in 2010.

At home, Van Hollen is almost invulnerable to challenge. When Maryland Sen. Paul Sarbanes announced his retirement in early 2005, Van Hollen gave serious thought to jumping into the multicandidate Democratic primary. But with the likely prospect of his advancement in the House, he decided against it.