05/18/07
Bob Schaffer for Senate
I am privileged to consider among my friends Bob Schaffer, current member of the Colorado Board of Education and former three-term Congressman from Colorado's Fourth Congressional District.
I first met Bob when I participated in the Leadership Program of the Rockies, of which he is Chairman.
Throughout the course, Congressman Schaffer consistently impressed me with his commitment to liberty, his passion for history (and understanding the value of knowing it), his eloquence in defense of principle, and his very effective way of communicating and instructing others about the value of these principles.
Unlike many other elected officials who have made similar promises, Bob honored his term limits pledge and did not seek re-election after his third term in Congress. (Marilyn Musgrave now holds that seat.)
I've been very involved with Colorado politics in the past year and a half, as my regular readers know. Without getting into details of prior elections, let me simply say that I have in the past only found one candidate whom I believed to be as obviously worthy of our support (financial and otherwise) and our votes as I believe Bob Schaffer is.
As I've said and written many times, the GOP is (or at least should be) a "big tent" party. And that tent can include a variety of views on a variety of issues. But one of those issues is NOT taxes. A Republican who supports higher taxes is not adding another view to the tent; he is burning down the tent. Bob Schaffer understands this and has been a consistent friend to the taxpayer while serving in both state and federal government.
A primary reason that the GOP was so thoroughly trounced last November is that they spent like Democrats. Actually, that is fairly insulting to the Democrats. The Republicans achieved the incredibly unlikely feat of causing Americans to believe the Democrats were the party of fiscal responsibility. And who could blame Americans for thinking that after years of Bridges to Nowhere and outrageous pork barrel spending?
Bob understands the problem and is as sickened by the GOP's abandoning their fundamental commitment to limited govermnent and low taxes. He will not be what we in the options trading business used to call a "hand raiser", i.e. just doing what the leadership is doing. He will stand for the principles which he understands as well or better than anyone I've ever met. He will defend the taxpayer, defend liberty, and work to make our government something that Madison and Jefferson might recognize as the America they envisioned when writing our founding documents.
Yes, if there is a social issue that comes up for a vote, Bob is not likely to vote the way I would, but I can live with that. He understands not only the proper limits of the Federal Government in most social issues but more importantly the fact that we have much bigger fish to fry, such as out-of-control government spending, corrupt earmarks, and of course Iraq.
I look forward to hearing debates between Bob and his Democrat opponent because while Mark Udall is a nice guy, he is simply no match for Bob Schaffer when it comes to understanding issues and communicating a principled and sensible position. If people vote based on what they see and hear, rather than simply party line or because of an overall distaste for Republicans at the moment, Bob should win. But other people I thought "should win" didn't in the last election, and I take nothing for granted.
I will link to Bob's senate campaign site when I have the link. For now, you can read Bob's positions on the education-related issues which he deals with while trying to bring competition and accountability to our state's public education system:
http://www.bobschaffer.org/opinion.html
This is going to be a very tough and targeted campaign. Indeed, it will probably be the highest priority race for both parties in which there is not an incumbent candidate. I do not know whether the environment will be better, worse, or about the same for Republicans in late 2008 as it was in late 2006, but there is no doubt this race will be hard-fought by both sides.
I want to encourage all of you to contribute to Bob's campaign. Like it or not, campaigns are expensive. If you don't help and the other guy wins, you'll have yourself to blame, at least a little. If Udall wins, you'll have 6 years to wonder whether you could have made the difference as you suffer a Senator who knows little outside of environmental issues and whose economic positions would go over swimmingly in Sweden or Germany, but which are anathema to capitalism, liberty, and the spirit of entrepreneurship which has made America great.
Our current path, the path of the current Democrat leadership and the Republicans who have been corrupted by power, is the path toward lower standards of living, higher taxes, less freedom, and an America that our ancestors would not recognize. We must elect Bob Schaffer to help guide our government back toward actually honoring their pledge to protect and defend the Constitution.
I will be putting my money where my mouth is as soon as Bob tells me where to send the check. I will ask the same of you, whether you live in Colorado or not. Our country needs men like Bob Schaffer in government, and the only way to get him there is by contributing our time, money, and energy to his campaign. Especially at such a crucial time in our history, with looming problems on the home front and abroad, men like Congressman Schaffer are necessary for our nation to survive as the beacon of liberty which it has been since 1776.
I give my strongest endorsement to Bob Schaffer in his campaign for the US Senate, and urge all of you to support him any way you can.
2 comments
As you know, I was highly critical of the Club for Growth for endorsing Doug Lamborn. It was by far the biggest mistake the Club ever made and I can't say I fully understand the politics behind their decision, because I do believe it was at least as political as principled.
I have been involved with CFG almost since its founding, however, and despite this glaring and close-to-home error, they generally do very good and very important work. I believe that most voters, even in the 5th CD, will be able to separate the issues.
Furthermore, the issue with Lamborn was a primary versus another (better) Republican in Jeff Crank, as well as some others who were not so good. I would be quite surprised if Bob Schaffer had a primary challenger. Therefore, Club members who receive Club recommendations are not going to be looking at a Lamborn vs. Crank type of situation but rather a solid intellectual conservative (Schaffer) versus a liberal, not especially intellectual environmentalist (Mark Udall). The choice will be very clear, and there's just no way any significant number of Republicans or Independents will vote for Udall just because the Club endorsed Schaffer, no matter how angry they are with the Club for what it did in the 5th in the last election.
So, I understand that people are angry with the CFG, but I just don't see "serious blowback" against Schaffer because of it. Schaffer is too good a person and too good a candidate for Republicans in the 5th to hold the Club's endorsement against him. Beyond that, keep in mind that the Senate race is not just run in the 5th, and people outside the 5th (other than a few people like me) aren't even aware of the controversy surrounding the CFG in that election. The Club's endorsement would be a huge net positive for Bob Schaffer, not only in Colorado but to encourage out-of-state donors as well. You can be certain that the liberal 527s will be working very hard to raise out-of-state money for Udall, and the Club is the only serious competition for them.
You are probably aware how strongly I supported Jeff Crank over Doug Lamborn. To me, Crank was obviously not only the better candidate, but the better man. I am still convinced that is the case. As an active participant in the Colorado Club for Growth, I (and not just I) had some very angry conversations with the highest level of management at the national Club. But it would just be silly to hold the CFG's decision against Bob Schaffer.
I know Bob Schaffer, and I can not think of one single candidate for anything in the upcoming elections who is his equal in intellect, honesty, experience, and just being a decent guy. I couldn't care less if Pat Toomey made a mistake in a prior election as long as he does the right thing in this one. After all, this election is MUCH more important than a Republican primary (between two guys with similar positions on issues) in a strongly Republican district in the House.
With Schaffer, we're talking about probably the highest visibility and most competitive race for an open Senate seat and that's a Senate that is one vote from switching control. No matter how angry you were with Pat Toomey, if you're a Republican, or an independent voter who sees the obvious superiority of Bob Schaffer over Mark Udall (and I believe it will be very obvious to all who are not simply party-line voters once they debate each other), it simply doesn't make sense to vote for the wrong guy because you're upset with another group who endorsed the right guy.
It is very difficult to toss an incumbent, and given what a brutal campaign I expect Schaffer's to be, I would encourage Jeff Crank not to run again right now and 5th CD Republicans to focus on beating Udall rather than beating a guy who, while maybe neither the brightest bulb nor the hardest worker, is basically fine on the issues (at least as far as most 5th CD Republicans go, as he is too socially conservative for me and too emphatic that those are his most important issues.)
My view could theoretically reverse, i.e. to thinking that Jeff should run, if I come to believe that Lamborn will receive a primary challenge anyway, that he is truly vulnerable to the challenge, and that if Lamborn is the GOP candidate on the ticket, it might hurt GOP turnout and thus hurt Bob Schaffer. But, I think that combination of events is unlikely. First, I would suggest that the GOP establishment as well as other organizations that might support Jeff or be neutral if it were an open seat will line up behind Lamborn. So he is probably not as vulnerable as many (maybe including me) would wish. Second, if Jeff does challenge, and forces the GOP leadership to spend money and energy defending a conservative Republican incumbent from another conservative Republican, then if Jeff loses (and maybe even if he wins) he will probably not be able to get support from Washington for another campaign for a decade or more. In other words, if Jeff challenges and loses, it would be a major long-term setback for his political career. If he challenges and wins, he won't be particularly appreciated by Republicans outside his voter base in the 5th CD. And third, since this year will include a presidential race that will have the electorate highly energized, it isn't likely that the presence of any particular GOP Congressional candidate will cause an important difference in turnout. If Lamborn were to lose, then his voters would be disheartened just as Crank's were last time, so it's not obvious that there's an important overall gain for the GOP or difference in turnout which might come from a successful primary challenge to Lamborn, and I don't think a challenge is likely to succeed.
In summary, I think it would be a mistake for 5th CD voters to hold a CFG endorsement of Bob Schaffer against him, and I don't think more than a small handful would make that mistake in this situation. And second, I think it may be a bad use of the time, energy, and money of motivated GOP activists to try to toss Lamborn even though I'd be perfectly happy to see him lose to Jeff Crank. Instead that energy should be focused on supporting Bob Schaffer in a far more difficult and far more important race, not just for Colorado but for the nation.
Comment feed for this postLeave a comment
