Voice For Liberty

Tag: Politics

  • Kansas fourth district poll shows tightening race with Pompeo in lead

    KWCH Television in Wichita and SurveyUSA have released a poll of candidates seeking the Republican Party nomination for United States Congress from the fourth district of Kansas.

    The survey shows support for Wichita businessman Jim Anderson and Kansas Senator Jean Schodorf on the rise, while the numbers for Wichita businessman Wink Hartman continue to decline. The support for Wichita businessman Mike Pompeo also fell slightly, well within the poll’s level of sampling error.

    The numbers have Pompeo leading with 31 percent, Schodorf with 24 percent, Hartman with 23 percent, Anderson with 13 percent, and Latham engineer Paij Rutschman at two percent.

    Undecided voters are at six percent. The poll was conducted July 26th through 28th. The margin of sampling error is 3.5 percent.

    Interestingly, this poll has Schodorf at the same level of support as shown in her own internal poll released earlier this week. Her poll, however, showed her in first place with 24 percent support, with Pompeo in second place at 21 percent. That difference is within the poll’s sampling error.

    The Schodorf poll had 32 percent of voters as undecided, which is — and has been the case with all of Schodorf’s surveys — several times higher than the six percent undecided measured by SurveyUSA.

    State of the State KS is working on a poll that should be released today or tomorrow. This will provide another independent measure of voter sentiment as election day — August 3rd — draws near.

    Some voters have already voted. At yesterday’s meeting of the Sedgwick County Commission, Election Commissioner Bill Gale said that about 13,000 mail ballots have been sent to voters, with about half being returned already.

    In the 2008 primary election, 36,724 ballots were cast in Sedgwick County. With 6,500 ballots already returned, this means that at least 17 percent of voters (assuming the same turnout as in 2008) have already voted.

    For the fourth Kansas Congressional district, about 71 percent of the population is in Sedgwick County.

    On the Democratic Party side of this race, it appears that the television advertisements appearing for Raj Goyle are working. He trailed in the last poll two weeks ago, but now leads opponent Robert Tillman 63 percent to 19 percent, with 18 percent undecided. Two weeks ago Tillman led Goyle 40 percent to 36 percent.

    Kansas fourth Congressional district poll resultsKansas fourth Congressional district poll results

  • Kansas fourth Congressional district campaign finance reports

    Candidates for the Republican Party nomination for United States Congress from the fourth district of Kansas have filed campaign finance reports for the first two weeks of July and some last-minute reports since then.

    The reports show Wichita businessman Wink Hartman continuing to self-finance his campaign, with $0 in outside contributions collected in July. His campaign continues to spend at a rapid pace.

    The candidates for this nomination and their campaign websites are Wichita businessman Jim Anderson, Wichita businessman Wink Hartman, Wichita businessman Mike Pompeo, Latham engineer Paij Rutschman, and Kansas Senator Jean Schodorf.

    Here is a summary of FEC campaign finance reports for the first part of July 2010:

    Kansas Fourth District Republican campaign finance reports,
July 1, 2010 through July 14, 2010

               Anderson  Hartman   Pompeo  Schodorf
Contributions    2,060         0   49,347    14,891
Candidate loans      0   289,537        0         0
Expenditures     2,240   427,872  207,830    23,172
Cash balance     4,049    40,958  286,032     8,823

    Figures for Rutschman were not available at the FEC data site.

    Figures that stand out in this report include zero dollars raised by the Hartman campaign from individual contributions. All money raised during this period came from the candidate himself.

    Also, Hartman spent more than twice as much as the second-largest spender.

    Pompeo has, by far, the largest cash balance as of July 14. Normally this would be a positive factor as the campaign proceeds to election day. Hartman’s smaller cash balance, however, has little of the normal meaning associated with it, as the candidate makes frequent contributions to his campaign as funds are required. This is characteristic of self-financed campaigns.

    From the start of the election cycle through July 14, 2010, the numbers look like this:

    Kansas Fourth District Republican campaign finance reports,
through July 14, 2010

              Anderson   Hartman   Pompeo Rutschman Schodorf
Contributions  38,924    141,949  935,087       80   50,338
Candidate loans 3,275  1,563,137        0   30,000   29,006
Expenditures   37,301  1,664,129  649,054   24,464   70,521

    (Rutschman’s figures are through June 30, 2010)

    In this table we see the largely self-financed Hartman campaign outspending all other candidates. His campaign has spent more than twice as much as all other campaigns together.

    This still isn’t the entire story, as candidates are filing “48 hour notice” reports of last-minute contributions (expenditures are not included in these filings). Through July 28, 2010, here are the numbers:

               Anderson   Hartman  Pompeo
Total        5,100    348,500  35,700

    (Schodorf and Rutschman have not filed any of these reports.)

    In the case of Hartman, the total of $348,500 is all from the candidate himself. Overall, the Hartman campaign has raised $2,053,586, with 93 percent from candidate self-financing.

    According to OpenSecrets.org, a project of the Center for Responsive Politics, the average amount spent by winning candidates in 2008 for the U.S. House of Representatives was $1,372,591. Hartman is well over this figure.

    Each House district has roughly the same population, although the cost of running campaigns varies widely due to the differing characteristics of districts.

    Self-financed candidates

    As the Kansas fourth district has one candidate who is self-financed, let’s take a look at self-financed candidates and their characteristics.

    In writing about political scientist Jennifer A. Steen and her book, Self-Financed Candidates in Congressional Elections (University of Michigan Press, 2006), Bruce Bartlett wrote this:

    One of her findings is that the necessity of asking people for contributions is valuable to a candidate, especially inexperienced ones. She thinks this is mainly because self-financing keeps bad candidates from being weeded out of contention by a lack of contributions. But I think it also results because once people have given someone a campaign contribution they become invested in that candidate and are more willing to vote for him or her on Election Day and to work on his or her behalf.

    Voters also resent candidates who appear to be trying to buy an election. Self-financed candidates may be independent of special interests, but they also often appear aloof from the concerns of average voters. Having to ask people for money forces a candidate to take their feedback, thus learning about their concerns directly rather than filtered through pollsters and consultants.

    In her book, Steen writes: “They [self-financers] are also less likely to engage in what Richard Feuno calls ‘two-way’ campaigning, or interaction between the candidate and constituency, which thus entails some degree of learning and responsiveness on the candidates part.”

    Perhaps as a result, self-financed candidates don’t have a very good track record of winning elections. Steen found that for competitive U.S. House of Representative districts, candidates who are “extreme self-financers” (Hartman falls in this category) won 37 percent of primary election contests. That winning percentage falls to 31 percent in general elections.

    Voters are interested in what type of representative a candidate would make. Do self-financed candidates differ from other candidates once in office? Steen writes: “These differences do not recommend self-financers as representatives. They are quite unlike the vast majority of citizens, even citizens in more affluent districts, and they are less likely than non-self-financers to confront and engage the citizens they seek to represent.”

    Self-financed candidates usually claim that since they have a source of campaign funds independent from the usual sources — which these candidates usually describe as “corrupt” or undesirable in some other sinister way — they can act in the best interests of all their constituents once in office. But Steen found differently: “However, once elected most self-financers assimilate very rapidly to the norms of fund-raising — only a small percentage continue to resist the charms of campaign contributors.”

    Kansas fourth Congressional district campaign financeKansas fourth Congressional district campaign finance

  • Hartman ad claims remain elusive

    The claims made last week in a campaign advertisement by Wichita businessman Wink Hartman remain elusive and largely unproven.

    Hartman is running for the Republican Party nomination for United States Congress from the fourth district of Kansas. The other candidates and their campaign websites are Wichita businessman Jim Anderson, Wichita businessman Mike Pompeo, Latham engineer Paij Rutschman, and Kansas Senator Jean Schodorf.

    Scott Paradise, the Hartman campaign manager, will not accommodate my request to view the documents that he says prove the allegations in the ad.

    Paradise said he is “not happy” with some things I’ve written about Hartman. I don’t imagine he is, as I’ve written several articles critical of Hartman. But I offered to go to the campaign office and look at the documents and hear what the campaign had to say.

    What voters are left with is a last-minute inflammatory charge made by Hartman against Pompeo without having evidence of the charges. We know this is true because the campaign wasn’t able to produce evidence immediately and had to wait for the accuser to supply documents. That evidence, when examined by two Wichita Eagle reporters, appeared to indicate that Thayer Aerospace, Pompeo’s company, made “late, and in some cases reduced, payments” to one of its suppliers.

    The accuser says the company didn’t pay and drove him out of business and into bankruptcy. There’s a lot of distance between these two claims.

    We also know that the Hartman campaign ran the ad without identifying the businessman, perhaps hoping that no one would be able to identify him and investigate his claims.

    Florida issue miscast

    At issue also has been Hartman’s residency. Critics say that by claiming a “homestead” property tax exemption on a home he owns in Florida, Hartman became a Florida — not Kansas — resident.

    There’s also been discussion as to whether he filed income taxes as a Kansas or Florida resident. Hartman says he’s paid all his taxes in Kansas.

    But voting is something over which there is no controversy. As first reported on this site, Hartman most recently voted in Florida. Both he and his wife voted in Florida’s general election and presidential preference primary election in 2008.

    They didn’t register to vote in Kansas until July of last year.

    Voting by mail is popular in Sedgwick County, with 36 percent of the ballots cast in the November 2008 general election cast by mail. It doesn’t cost anything more than a postage stamp and the desire to cast your vote where you feel your political home is.

  • In Kansas first Congressional district, it’s knotted

    New polling by KWCH Television and SurveyUSA indicate a very close race for the Republican party nomination for United States Congress from the first district of Kansas.

    The candidates for this nomination and their campaign websites are physician and Kansas Senator Jim Barnett of Emporia, educator Sue Boldra of Hays, attorney and mediator Marck Cobb of Galva, farmer and Kansas Senator Tim Huelskamp of Fowler, Salina commercial real estate executive Tracey Mann, and Senator Brownback chief of staff Rob Wasinger of Cottonwood Falls.

    The poll, with data collected July 24th through July 26th, shows three candidates — Barnett, Huelskamp, and Mann — tied, each with 24 percent of the vote.

    The most recent poll by this firm from two weeks ago showed the same three candidates all within the survey’s sampling error. According to the pollster, the race was tied at that time, and it’s tied now.

    It’s just that with the three candidates polling the exact same number, it feels like it’s really tied.

    There are several trends evident in the chart: First, the meteoric rise of Mann has peaked. His numbers are down slightly, although within the margin of sampling error.

    Second, Huelskamp continues on his upward trend. His numbers are higher than two weeks ago, although within the margin of sampling error.

    Third, Barnett’s numbers are largely unchanged since the start of the polling in February.

    Finally, the number of undecided voters continues to drop and is now at just seven percent.

    Kansas first Congressional district poll resultsKansas first Congressional district poll results

  • Schodorf poll shows her campaign in lead

    Yesterday the campaign of Kansas Senator Jean Schodorf released a poll that shows her in the lead in the race for the Republican Party nomination for United States Congress from the fourth district of Kansas.

    The candidates and their campaign websites are Wichita businessman Jim Anderson, Wichita businessman Wink Hartman, Wichita businessman Mike Pompeo, Latham engineer Paij Rutschman, and Kansas Senator Jean Schodorf.

    The poll was conducted on July 22, before the Wichita Eagle editorial board announced its endorsement of Schodorf. It shows her with 24 percent of the vote. Pompeo is in second place with 21 percent, Hartman in third with 16 percent, and Anderson with seven percent.

    The question asked of voters, according to Schodorf, is “If the election for congress were today, would you be voting for Jean Schodorf, Jim Anderson, Mike Pompeo, or Wink Hartman”? Candidate names are rotated. The poll question does not included candidate Rutschman.

    The 400 poll respondents were selected from those who had voted in the last two primary elections in the fourth district. The campaign says that “This number of interviews produces survey results that are accurate at the 95% level of confidence.” No margin of error was given for this confidence level, but in a conversation with Jim Yonally of Jayhawk Consulting Services, the firm that conducted the poll, he said the sampling error was four percentage points.

    That means that Schodorf’s lead of three percentage points is within the margin of sampling error.

    As with all polls produced on behalf of a candidate, we need to remember that surveys produced and released by campaigns are just that, and the results would probably not be released by a campaign if the results did not portray the candidate favorably.

    Schodorf’s three publicly-released polls could not have turned out better for the candidate. Starting low, each poll has showed her increasing her numbers, until this poll shows her in the lead.

    Besides being the first poll showing Schodorf in the lead, her campaign polls have always differed from the independent polls in showing a very high number of undecided voters. Yonally said he believes that his firm’s practice of using human operators to conduct the survey produces more accurate results than do automated polling systems.

    The poll also indicates Pompeo’s support increasing, while Hartman’s drops.

    KWCH Television will release an independent SurveyUSA poll of the fourth district this week, I am told.

    Kansas fourth Congressional district poll resultsKansas fourth Congressional district poll results

  • At RightOnline, John Fund is hopeful, but warns

    At Saturday’s general session of the RightOnline conference at The Venetian in Las Vegas, Wall Street Journal columnist John Fund told the audience of 1,100 conservative activists that they will win in November, but opposition is already planning to derail the victory.

    Fund said he is doing double duty this weekend, covering both RightOnline and the Netroots Nation conference, a gathering of liberal — or “progressive” — activists. He said that the attendees at Netroots Nation are sullen, depressed, and confused. “People don’t seem to want to change America quite the they way they want to.”

    Fund said that at the time of last year’s Netroots Nations conference, the health care bill was sinking in the polls. Liberals were told that all they had to do is to pass the health care bill, and the American people will embrace it. Fund asked “Well, how’s that working out for you?” The health care bill is as unpopular as it was on the day it passed.

    He told the audience that a new poll says that 55 percent of Americans believe that the word “socialist” best describes President Barack Obama. Even his own party is having questions, Fund said.

    He told how pollster Pat Cadell — Jimmy Carter‘s pollster — says that polls indicate the country is in a “pre-revolutionary mentality.”

    In the last 18 months, Fund said that the American people — having been disappointed by both political parties — have decided to take things into their own hands: “Politics is too important to be left just to politicians.”

    Fund said that by harnessing the power of the Internet and new media, conservatives have been able to create a political force that has astonished the entire political community, telling the audience that they now have more power to influence government than any previous generation.

    As evidence, Fund said that conservatives have scared their adversaries into a panic. They have lashed back using scare tactics, including the charge of racism. Referring to BigGovernment.com‘s $100,000 reward for video evidence of an alleged ugly racial incident on Capitol Hill, he noted it has gone unclaimed.

    Fund said there is now evidence as to why the charge of racism is made. Quoting Mary Francis Berry, Professor of History at the University of Pennsylvania, former chairwoman of the United States Commission on Civil Rights, and an influential civil right leader, he said: “Tainting the tea party movement with the charge of racism is proving to be an effective strategy for Democrats. There is no evidence that tea party adherents are any more racist than other Republicans, and indeed many other Americans. But getting them to spend their time purging their ranks and having candidates distance themselves should help Democrats win in November. Having one’s opponent rebut charges of racism is far better than discussing joblessness.”

    Fund said there’s good news: “You’re going to have a big victory in November.” But already the “beltway party” — that being the members of both parties who want to spend your money — is already plotting to thwart you. He said that Trent Lott, the former Senate majority leader, told a newspaper that “We don’t need any more Jim DeMints here in the Senate.” (DeMint is a conservative South Carolina senator who opposed increased spending during the Bush administration, and opposed bailouts.)

    Fund told the audience that a major problem is the upcoming lame duck session of Congress, where members of Congress who have just been defeated may vote on major legislation. He also said we have to be wary of Democrats who campaigned as moderates, but inevitably govern as liberals. President Obama fits in this category, he said.

  • Wichita Eagle endorsements deserve scrutiny

    The Wichita Eagle editorial board has made its endorsements for offices in the August 3rd Kansas primary election. Before voters decide whether to rely on these recommendations, they deserve some examination.

    For example, for the Kansas House of Representatives the Eagle endorsed incumbent Republican representative Jo Ann Pottorff for her “balanced voting record.” The Eagle said she was willing to stand apart from the area’s “hard-line conservatives.”

    But an examination of Pottorff’s voting record indicates something other than balance. This year, on the Kansas Economic Freedom Index (a project of this site), her score was 13 percent. That placed her in the tenth percentile of members of the Kansas House on a scale that rewards fiscally conservative votes. It’s a liberal voting record, in other words. We might even say a “hard-line liberal” voting record.

    (If the Eagle was to criticize a liberal, however, it would probably use the softer and preferred term “progressive.” Even liberals try to hide their lineage.)

    Other examples of language that reveals the Wichita Eagle’s bias is in their endorsement of an opponent to current representative Joe McLeland. In its endorsement, the Eagle editorial board wrote: “Unfortunately, he also seemed at times to be a yes-man for GOP leadership and anti-tax think tanks. It was particularly disappointing how McLeland, the chairman of the House Education Budget Committee, parroted misleading information about school budgets during the past session.”

    Why didn’t the Eagle write this about Pottorff: “Unfortunately, she seemed to be a yes-woman for the governor and the anti-economic freedom, big-spending teachers union leadership and school spending advocacy groups”?

    Regarding McLeland, the Eagle is probably referring to the controversy about unspent school fund balances. The Eagle, along with the teachers union and other school spending lobbies, didn’t believe that these balances existed and wrote so in several opinion pieces. The Eagle probably still doesn’t believe these funds exist, notwithstanding the fact that the schools spent the very same fund balances they said didn’t exist and couldn’t be spent: “By using fund balances, schools in Kansas were able to increase spending by an estimated $320 million in the current school year. Revenue to Kansas school districts declined by about $50 million, but $370 in fund balances were used to boost total spending by $320 million.”

    So when the Eagle makes an endorsement based on a factually unsound position, what should voters do?

    In the Republican party primary for Sedgwick County Commission District 4, the Eagle chose Lucy Burtnett over Richard Ranzau, praising Burtnett’s “thoughtful voting record” during her two years as an appointed commissioner.

    In 2006, while campaigning for this same position, Burtnett was reported by the Wichita Eagle to have this reaction to a proposed Sedgwick County property tax increase: “Lucy Burtnett, the current 4th District county commissioner, told 30 people attending a candidate forum at the Northeast Senior Center that none of the commissioners find the increase acceptable.” Part of the purpose of the proposed tax increase was to fund a jail expansion.

    After losing the primary election, Burtnett voted in favor of a tax increase that was somewhat smaller than what the county manager originally proposed. Its purpose, partially, was to fund a jail expansion.

    Two years later — realizing the jail expansion wasn’t necessary after all — the county rolled back part of the tax increase that Burtnett voted for.

    “Thoughtful” voting record, as the Eagle endorsement said? Or thoughtless?

    For Republican Party nomination for United States Congress from the fourth district of Kansas, the Eagle chose Kansas Senator Jean Schodorf.

    Describing her as “not overly ideological or partisan,” the Eagle again overlooks facts.

    Webster’s dictionary gives one definition of ideology as “the integrated assertions, theories and aims that constitute a sociopolitical program.” The Eagle uses this term with a dark connotation, implying that candidates with ideologies are inflexible and unwilling to consider anything other than their own views. Other liberal media outlets use this term in the same way.

    But ideologies cut both ways. And Schodorf hasn’t seen many school spending programs and accompanying taxes that she won’t vote for. This is in spite of evidence that schools had money they weren’t spending, and that all the spending hasn’t done much to improve student outcomes. (The Eagle and Schodorf would have to look beyond the fraudulent Kansas state assessment scores to see that.)

    The view of Schodorf and the Wichita Eagle editorial board is that Kansas public schools are always underfunded, and schools can be fixed only with more money. That’s an ideology, and one that is demonstrably harmful to Kansas schoolchildren.

    This is all the more striking when we consider that Schodorf is chair of the Senate Education Committee. She has been in one of the most powerful positions to do something for Kansas schoolchildren, but she has not done that. So when the Eagle praises her for being “a pragmatist who cares about finding real solutions, not scoring political points,” consider that Kansas has few of the reforms such as charter schools and school choice that are working in other states. These are “real solutions” that the Eagle doesn’t favor. Instead, Schodorf seeks favor and campaign contributions from the teachers union and school spending lobby, earning the “political points” the Eagle editorial board purportedly condemns.

    As for not being partisan, Schodorf simply belongs to the wrong party, if we are to believe that the Republican Party is home to conservative thought and practice. Schodorf’s voting record this year is more liberal — considering the same bills — than that of the presumptive Democratic Party nominee for this position.

    It’s pretty easy to appear non-partisan when your party label is wrong.

    It’s hard to tell, but it appears that the Eagle editorial board gave extra consideration to its Schodorf endorsement because she didn’t run a negative campaign. Regarding Mike Pompeo, the Eagle wrote, after listing his credentials, “It’s too bad he ran such an ugly campaign.”

    That “ugly campaign,” however, can be viewed as simply responding to the allegations and charges made by another candidate. He didn’t attack Schodorf — perhaps he should have — so she, as well as the other candidates, didn’t have to defend themselves.

  • Herman Cain: Conservatives should dream, be united, informed, inspired

    Herman CainHerman Cain

    At this weekend’s RightOnline conference at The Venetian in Las Vegas, businessman and radio talk show host Herman Cain delivered an inspirational message to the audience of some 1,100 conservative activists from across the country.

    Cain has a nightly radio show and is a frequent guest host for the Neal Boortz show, which is heard in Wichita on KNSS radio. Cain has been an executive at several companies, including serving as president of Godfather’s Pizza, a unit of Pillsbury. He appears on Fox News, and WorldNet Daily carries his weekly column.

    He also runs The Hermanator PAC, which seeks to elect economically responsible conservatives to office. His name is mentioned in lists of presidential contenders for 2012, and he may launch a presidential exploratory committee.

    Speaking at Saturday’s general session at RightOnline, Cain told the audience “The tragedy in life does not lie in not reaching your goals; the tragedy lies in having no goals to reach for. It’s not a calamity to die with dreams unfulfilled, but it is a calamity to have no dreams.”

    Cain said that his dream is that we return to the principles that the Founding Fathers envisioned for what turned out to be the greatest country in the world: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. “It didn’t say anything about a Department of Happy!” It is the pursuit of happiness that is mentioned.

    Cain told the audience there are three things the audience must do: First, conservatives and their citizen movements must stay united in their efforts take back our government.

    Second, conservatives must stay informed. “Stupid people are ruining this country,” he said, telling the audience that over half the people can be persuaded by a slick speech or a slick campaign ad.

    Third, conservatives must stay inspired. Telling the audience the story of his recovery from cancer, he said his inspiration for his work comes from God Almighty.

    He also related the story of the bumblebee, and how aerodynamic equations and computer models predict that the bumblebee should not be able to fly. “There’s only one reason the bumblebee flies: He didn’t get the memo that said he couldn’t. The bumblebee believes he can fly.”

    Telling the audience that they have “bumblebee power,” he believes that conservatives can take back the government in November 2010.

    Cain also mentioned what he calls the “SIN” tactics that liberals employ: First, they shift the subject, then they ignore the facts. “Liberals can’t handle the facts,” he told the audience, and that’s why they shift the subject and ignore the facts.

    Finally, liberals resort to name-calling, calling himself and other conservatives racists, a charge he said is ridiculous and has backfired.

    Later that day, I had an interview with Cain in his suite at Encore Las Vegas. Casually dressed and sipping a glass of wine, he was more relaxed than during his energetic speech earlier that day, although eventually his engaging enthusiasm broke out.

    Referring to his optimism for the chances of conservatives in the upcoming elections, I said I’m not so sure, even pessimistic. Why am I wrong, I asked?

    Cain said that callers — both to his Monday through Friday radio show and when he substitutes for Boortz and Sean Hannity — express their frustrations with the direction of the country, the stalled economy, and lack of private sector job creation. That makes him optimistic. Callers say they’ve been duped by the “hope and change” message, and they’re waking up.

    Another factor he cited is the ongoing Gallup poll showing conservatives outnumbering liberals two to one, and independents and moderates outnumbering liberals one-and-a-half to one. He said this tells him that the numbers are on our side.

    I asked Cain about the controversy about the Civil Rights Act of 1964: As a black man, who at age 64, growing up in the south, faced real and actual discrimination: Is our country better off for it?

    “Absolutely we are,” he said, for both the Civil Rights act of 1964 and the Voter Rights Act of 1965, adding that they had historical impact on our country.

    The Great Society programs and the rise of the modern welfare state: Are we better off for that? No, he said. He said that these programs didn’t provide enough incentives for people to help themselves. “That’s what’s wrong with most of the social programs today. That’s why they need to be modernized. When you provide incentives, and you provide help, but you also have requirements in there for people to help themselves: guess what? The programs will work.” But people have figured out how to game the system, and then the programs don’t work.

    “Look at systemic poverty, look at crime, look at the quality of education in our inner cities — it’s all worse than it was.” The welfare reform of the 1990s, which required people to do certain things in order to continue to receive a check, shows that when people have an incentive to help themselves, they will use assistance programs more effectively, he said.

    Since he mentioned education, I explained that in Kansas we have very few charter schools, and no school choice. What are we missing out on in Kansas? Are we behind the curve?

    Yes, he said. “Competition makes everything better.” He told about the success of the Washington DC school choice program, with over 90 percent of the students going on to college. But the Democrat-led Congress and the President would not re-authorize the program. The teachers unions don’t like competition, he said, and this was the reason why.

    I mentioned that often liberals are opposed to school choice because they say that poor uneducated parents are not equipped to make decisions regarding schools for their children. This is not true, Cain said. “It’s part of that whole attitude that government can make better decisions for a poor family then they can make for themselves.”

    A focus of this conference is that liberty and free markets are superior in creating prosperity for everyone. But many people believe that one person becomes rich only if others become poor. I asked: Why do people believe that? Why have we as conservatives not been successful in getting out that message? Why doesn’t the president seemed to believe that?

    Cain said that President Obama doesn’t believe this because he is “at least a socialist.” Republicans have not been good about managing “sharper, clearer messages about certain things.” He said and the Republican National Committee focuses on raising money, which is good, but they don’t do a good job of explaining what the Republican Party stands for. Cain said that while he supported current chairman Michael Steele for that job, he doesn’t know what Steele believes are the priorities or focal points for Republican candidates running for office in November.

    While we know that we have to do something about spending, taxes, and education, these are general, broad statements, he said. We even know how to fix most problems. “We just don’t have the political will or the leadership to fix some of these problems. That’s what America faces, that’s our biggest challenge.”

  • Mike Pence at RightOnline

    At an afternoon session of the RightOnline Conference in Las Vegas, Indiana Congressman Mike Pence said that the November elections will be a great comeback for conservative values. He’s optimistic, and he likes our chances. Pence is Chairman of the House Republican Conference.

    What a difference a year makes, he told the audience of some 1,100 conservative activists. Democrats dominated both houses of Congress. Elections in Virginia, New Jersey, and Massachusetts changed that. “Even Republicans in Congress have returned to the fight for fiscal prudence and limited government.”

    The American people walked away from the Republican Party, he said. But now Republicans are back in the fight.

    Democrats in Washington are out of ideas, he said. Disputing claims that the stimulus worked, he said that 2.4 million Americans have lost their jobs. But Americans don’t want to rely on jobless benefits, they want jobs. It’s not only a fiscal crisis in Washington, he said it is morally wrong to take the resources of future generations to deal with today’s problems.

    Democrats have increased taxes by $670 billion dollars, and they’re embracing the largest tax increases in history — the expiration of the Bush tax cuts. House Republicans will oppose this tax increase with everything they’ve got, he said.

    He said that if we get government under control and out of the way, America will come roaring back.

    Bailouts must end, and he said that the recently-passed financial reform bill must be repealed.

    On spending, he said we should limit federal spending to 20 percent of the nation’s economy by adopting a constitutional amendment. It was just a few years ago it was at 18 percent, he said, and the historic average since World War II is 20 percent.