Category: political challengers

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall political challengers term limits

Competition in Michigan

Michigan’s career politicians are pushing to more than double maximum tenure in the state house and almost double it in the state senate.

Michigan currently caps service at three two-year terms, or six years, in the house and two four-year terms, or eight years, in the senate. Thus the “combined limit” on both chambers is 14 years. The new law would allow lawmakers to serve up to 14 years in a single legislative seat. This of course would drastically weaken term limits and severely crimp electoral competition.

Now, term limits help make possible such refreshing political campaigns as that of Leon Drolet, director of the Michigan Taxpayers Alliance and a former state representative. He is vying for Michigan’s 11th state senate seat, now open because the incumbent is prevented by term limits from standing for re-election. Another former state representative as well as a current one are also running for the seat.

I bet that when one of these challengers gets elected — and certainly if it’s Drolet, with his strong anti-tax, anti-pork message — incumbents will keep moaning about the loss of “experience” wrought by term limits.

But Drolet has experience, too — fighting governmental assaults on the liberties of citizens. His co-authoring of a constitutional amendment to curb government’s power to grab private homes through eminent domain is relevant.

It’s just that ample experience in helping restrain government power isn’t the kind that certain politicians applaud.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
political challengers

Pardon the Vote

Over the weekend, Utah Republicans defeated three-term incumbent U.S. Senator Robert Bennett at their state convention. Two more conservative candidates, both with support among Tea Party activists, now move on to a primary election to decide the eventual GOP nominee.

Senator Bennett’s defeat marks the first U.S. senator to be denied re-nomination in Utah in 70 years.

The strangest part of this, though, is the strange reaction of much of the media. The morning paper says Bennett was as conservative as any rational human being could possibly desire . . . citing Democratic National Committee Chairman Tim Kaine.

Kathleen Parker, the liberal Washington Post’s idea of a conservative, lectured before the vote that “Tea Partyers risk losing some of their strongest voices.” Tea Party supporters seem determined to decide for themselves which voices speak for them.

Parker also smeared Tea Party folks as an anti-intellectual rabble, characterizing Bennett’s long tenure in Washington to be “as disadvantageous as having an Ivy League degree. Those out-of-touch elites, you know.”

Touchy. Very out-of-touchy. Forgotten by the maven? Bennett’s old pledge to serve only two terms.

Bennett had been seeking his fourth term.

E.J. Dionne called the Utah result a “non-violent coup.” Yes, just exactly like a coup — except for that voting part.

For those counting coup right now, establishment folks are receiving a whacking. No wonder they bristle.

Expect more.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
political challengers

If This Be . . .

Joe Klein, author of Primary Colors and contributor to Time magazine, is very defensive about criticism of the current administration and Congress.

Of Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck, he says the two talk “borderline sedition.”

Nice hedge, that word “borderline.”

But he’s merely repeating something he wrote last year about Senator Tom Coburn. The Oklahoma senator, responding to the Democrats’ extremely unpopular (and later successful) machinations to enact a form of national medical insurance, said that he understood why some would give up on their government. For this, Klein dubbed Coburn’s comments “borderline sedition” as well as “hate speech.”

How do I see it? Well, to note that Congress is unresponsive to Americans (and thus a cause for hopelessness) is not even close to sedition. It’s to recognize the obvious.

I’m not saying it doesn’t incite a kind of rebellion. But remember: In America, rebellion against those in charge is not just allowed, it’s been institutionalized.

The institution is called “elections.”

The current unrest in America — exemplified, at present, by the “Tea Party” protests — seems to be very much a patriotic thing. If the bulk of Democrats and Republicans get targeted as deserving to go, then the means to their removal is obvious. It comes next November, and in November 2012.

And it does not mean that restive American critics of unconstitutional government and habitual over-spending are not “loyal to the most important American ideals.” It means they understand these ideals better than does Joe Klein.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
political challengers

Merging or Diverging?

We live in interesting times. Strapped for cash, local and state governments are cutting spending and raising taxes. The federal government, with its chummy relationship with the Federal Reserve and our money supply, along with a shopaholic’s addiction to debt, continues to spend at record rates.

In this context, perhaps it is not so shocking that Congressman Ron Paul, known for being tight-fisted on spending, and for his push to audit the Fed, is basically even in a head-to-head match-up with President Obama. A Rasmussen Poll ticked Obama at 42 percent against Paul at 41 percent.

Interestingly, only 66 percent of Republicans chose Paul. It’s independent voters who are nearly 2-to-1 for Paul over the President.

Why do Republicans hesitate? Paul is a severe critic of the Republican Establishment, especially the GOP’s recent fondness for undeclared wars.

Meanwhile, the Tea Party movement is being courted by Alaska’s Sarah Palin and Minnesota’s Michele Bachmann. Representative Bachmann went so far to say that the GOP and the Tea Parties are merging.

I hope not. The main unifying feature of Tea Party protests remains out-of-control federal spending and borrowing. The GOP did nothing to curb this problem when it was in charge.

Both parties created the problem, as Rep. Paul points out. That’s why the Tea Party will be more effective as an independent political force, rallying Americans to hold both parties and all public officials accountable.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
local leaders political challengers

The Accidental Citizen Legislator

Humor writer. Mom. And politician?

That third item wasn’t in Susan Konig’s life plan. But six years ago, her fellow residents of Westchester County, New York, were having trouble with a local waste company. Susan wondered what she could do about it. Someone suggested she run for office.

But she wasn’t a politician, just a writer — and not even a political writer. And where was she going to find the time?

Still, Susan agreed to give it some thought. Then she got pregnant with her fourth child and stopped giving it thought. Then sewage backed up into her house. Twice. So she ran for the board of trustees as a Republican in a dominantly Democratic town, and won. She worked to curb taxes and spending. She got rid of the irresponsible waste company.

She narrowly lost re-election. After agreeing to run at the country level, she narrowly lost to a Democratic incumbent who had won by a large margin in his previous race.

Susan Konig doesn’t see either electoral loss as a tragedy, given the cage-rattling she accomplished. She learned that a great many people in both parties are sick of runaway taxes and spending. She also learned that even where political establishments are corrupt and calcified, opportunities remain for citizen legislators to do something about it.

Of course, she learned that lesson by proving it, herself.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
ballot access insider corruption political challengers

Independent at the FEC?

Nowhere has President Obama lost more support than among independent voters. So, now Mr. Obama is talking up bipartisanship. But his focus is too narrow. He needs to think more about NONpartisanship — or, perhaps, “transpartisanship.”

Take for instance the Federal Election Commission. The FEC is governed by six commissioners — three Republicans and three Democrats. As Theresa Amato, an attorney and author of Grand Illusion: The Myth of Voter Choice in a Two-Party Tyranny, wrote recently in the Kansas City Star, “[M]ake no mistake that the FEC is a partisan body.”

Amato — who serves on the board of Citizens in Charge Foundation, this program’s sponsor — explained that the FEC’s partisan make-up is not caused by “the demands of the law, merely the outcome of a ‘bipartisan’ rather than ‘nonpartisan’ appointment process.”

Amato suggests an easy way to break the partisan gridlock at the FEC and to reach out to the majority of Americans who identify as “independents”: Appoint the first non-Republican, non-Democrat as commissioner — someone independent, or a representative of a third party.

Months ago, leaders of IndependentVoting.org wrote to the president also urging him to shake up the FEC in exactly this manner.

It’s bad enough for a federal agency to regulate political campaigns and political speech. It’s worse to allow the two major parties to control such an agency. We need more independence — and thus independents.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
political challengers

Listening to the Voters

After Scott Brown captured the U.S. Senate seat Ted Kennedy had occupied for decades, we heard two different views of the event.

One said the surprise victory of an obscure state senator over the anointed Democrat in such a Democrat-leaning state had much to do with growing antagonism to runaway federal spending and spastic efforts to expand federal control over our lives. That Scott Brown promised to vote against Obamacare supports this view. So do exit polls showing that 41 percent of participants “strongly oppose” the health care legislation, only 25 percent “strongly favor” it.

The other notion is that Brown won only because people are frustrated. President Obama declared that “the same thing that swept Scott Brown into office swept [him] into office.” People are “angry and they are frustrated. Not just because of what’s happened in the last year or two years, but what’s happened over the last eight years.”

See, it’s all Bush-legacy stuff, not anything Obama and the Democrats have been doing.

Denial isn’t just a river in Egypt.

Not everyone’s wearing blinders. Soon after Brown won, Democratic Senator Jim Webb said the election had been a referendum on both health care legislation and “the integrity of the government process.” He urged fellow Democrats not to try ramming Obamacare through before Brown could be seated.

Hmmm. Listening to the voters. Good idea, Jim.

And it’s Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
insider corruption political challengers

Great Scott!

Just when you thought nothing could stop Congress from sucking another sector of American life and our economy into the dripping maw of government, a spark of hope.

Scott Brown, the Republican candidate for Massachusetts’s open U.S. Senate seat, won.

I’m sure I’d disagree with many of the senator elect’s opinions. But his campaign was based, loud and clear, on his promise to vote against the Democrats’ overblown, misguided, quasi-socialistic healthcare plan — a compelling enough message to propel a Republican to victory in a very Democratic state.

What now? Well, hopefully we are going to stop the big government juggernaut. That is, unless Democrats start playing some very dirty pool.

Will it be the kind of dirty pool MSNBC talk show host Ed Schultz endorses? In the final days of the campaign, Schultz bragged on his radio show that if he were a Massachusetts resident he’d cheat at the ballot box to stop Brown. “[I]f I lived in Massachusetts I’d try to vote ten times. . . . Yeah, that’s right. I’d cheat to keep these bastards out. I would.”

It’s not unheard of, in politics, for politicians and even activists to go off the deep end, foreswearing principle for the sweet smell of partisan success. But I bet one reason Brown won was that he represents the kind of above-board probity that Schultz and far too many in Congress — Democrats, and Republicans, too — utterly lack.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
political challengers term limits

Dollars and Change

Big spending by candidates doesn’t always win elections. For instance, New Jersey Governor — soon to be ex-Governor — Jon Corzine outspent his opponent, Chris Christie, more than three to one . . . and still lost.

Of course, spending more money usually works better than spending less.

Michael Bloomberg won his race for mayor of New York City. But barely. Bloomberg spent 16 times more than his challenger — over $100 million dollars to get just 50 percent. It cost him more than $150 for every vote. Ouch.

So, why did the mayor have to spend so much to eke out a win?  Two words: term limits.

Bloomberg’s deal with the council to gut the city’s two-term limit and allow them all to run for a third term didn’t cost him his powerful perch. But it did cost him millions of dollars. And his reputation.

There were also a number of initiatives on the ballot. Before Tuesday’s election, at Townhall.com, I highlighted Maine and Washington State measures to put a cap on state spending growth. Both measures were defeated, but it was educational to take note of the spending.

In the final months, Maine’s measure was outspent by about ten to one. Washington’s? $3.5 million to nothing. Predictably, the big money came  from groups already wealthy from standing in the receiving line for government spending.

Spending money to make money . . . spending money to take money.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
political challengers

Wake Me When It’s Over

There are gubernatorial elections, today, in Virginia and New Jersey. My Republican buddies in Virginia are excited. After losing to the Democrats in the last two elections for governor — and for president, and the last two U.S. Senate contests — Republicans are now poised to win back the governor’s mansion.

Me? I’m not as excited.

Oh, Bob McDonnell, a former legislator and then attorney general, doesn’t seem any worse, and may be better than your average politician. But his campaign has the usual messaging: more jobs, better education, more and better transportation. All new and improved. For less.

Strikingly similar to the Democrats, I dare say.

Except that McDonnell hasn’t flat-out said he’d raise anybody’s taxes. His opponent, Democrat Creigh Deeds, admits he would — only after a gallant attempt to dodge all those pesky questions and tip-toe around taxes.

No independent or third party candidate is on the ballot.

In New Jersey, the sitting governor, Democrat Jon Corzine, may win with less than 50 percent of the vote. What a shame that’d be — the majority votes against a guy and yet they’re still stuck with him.

The polls show it very close, with independent candidate Chris Daggett getting 7 to 13 percent.

I prefer Republican Chris Christie. He promotes voter initiative and referendum. He promises he’ll actively push to establish a statewide initiative process.

That would give people a real vote for change.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.