Voice For Liberty

Tag: Raj Goyle

  • For Raj Goyle, most money comes from outside Kansas

    In the race for United States Congress from the fourth district of Kansas between Democrat Raj Goyle and Republican Mike Pompeo, there’s a distinct difference in the nature and source of campaign contributions for the two candidates. So far, 70 percent of Goyle’s campaign contributions have come from donors outside Kansas, with Washington DC being the metropolitan area with the highest source of contributions.

    Analysis of campaign contributions may be found at OpenSecrets.org, a project of the Center for Responsive Politics. The following tables are based on data through the last comprehensive reporting period, which ended June 30, 2010.

    As of that date, Goyle had raised $1,255,403, and Pompeo had raised $935,084.

    The distribution between in-state and out-of-state donors is this:

                    In Kansas       Out of Kansas
Raj Goyle     $306,151 (30%)    $721,322 (70%)
Mike Pompeo   $646,572 (79%)    $167,743 (21%)

    During the primary election, a frequent criticism of Pompeo made by his opponents was that he was a “Washington insider,” and that was where much of his support and campaign funds were coming from. When looking at the metropolitan areas that contributions have come from, we see that little of Pompeo’s campaign contributions came from Washington, while Washington is the single largest source of Goyle’s funds, outpacing Wichita, the dominant population center in the fourth Congressional district of Kansas:

    For Raj Goyle:
Metro Area                  Total
WASHINGTON, DC-MD-VA-WV   $195,827
WICHITA                   $169,851
NEW YORK                  $109,385
KANSAS CITY, MO-KS        $105,400
SAN FRANCISCO              $35,552

For Mike Pompeo:
Metro Area                  Total
WICHITA                   $585,617
CHICAGO                    $20,400
WASHINGTON, DC-MD-VA-WV    $18,326
KANSAS CITY, MO-KS         $17,250
DALLAS                     $11,950

    An area of concern for some voters is the influence of political action committees (PACs). In the primary election, Pompeo’s opponents made frequent charges that he was beholden to PAC money. Looking again at data from OpenSecrets, we see that Goyle has received $76,250 in contributions from sources that OpenSecrets classifies as PACs. The figure for Pompeo is $28,000.

    OpenSecrets also classifies contributions based on the industry of the donor. For each candidate, here are the top five industries that made contributions:

    For Raj Goyle:
Sector                   Total
Lawyers & Lobbyists    $120,538
Finance/Insur/RealEst  $104,500
Ideology/Single-Issue  $100,629
Other                   $75,094
Health                  $72,403

For Mike Pompeo:
Sector                   Total
Finance/Insur/RealEst  $102,993 
Energy/Nat Resource     $62,850 
Construction            $35,950 
Other                   $35,700 
Lawyers & Lobbyists     $33,150

    In the Republican primary, Pompeo’s opponents charged that he was too close to lobbyists, but this category made up relatively little of his campaign dollars. If lobbyist contributions are a concern for voters, this industry category is the leading source of contributions for Goyle.

    An area where Goyle does better than Pompeo is in what OpenSecrets calls “quality of disclosure,” meaning how well the contributions include the names of donors and their occupations and employers. For Goyle, 3.1 percent of the contributions (based on dollar amounts) have “incomplete” or “none” for these pieces of data. For Pompeo, the figure is 11.8 percent.

    These reports include contributions made only through June 30, 2010. The focus at that time was the primary election, more for Republicans than Democrats, as Goyle faced an inexperienced and under-funded candidate, although at one time Goyle trailed in a poll. Now that the general election is the focus for both candidates, the characteristics and distribution of contributions may change.

  • Kansas fourth Congressional district poll released

    The first public poll covering the race for United States Congress from the Kansas fourth district shows a close race between the two leading contenders, with Republican Mike Pompeo edging Democrat Raj Goyle by 49 percent to 42 percent.

    Libertarian Party candidate David Moffett received four percent support, and Reform party candidate Susan Ducey received one percent. Five percent were undecided.

    The poll was released by KWCH Television in Wichita and SurveyUSA. The poll’s margin of sampling error was not given, but previous polls by this firm and similar to this have had a margin of sampling error of about four percentage points.

    Pompeo receives strong support from young voters. For those under 50 years old, Pompeo leads 59 percent to 28 percent, while for voters over 50, he trails Goyle by 41 percent to 51 percent.

    Men favor Pompeo 53 percent to 38 percent, while women favor Goyle 46 percent to 44 percent.

    Those who attend church regularly, those with pro-life beliefs, and gun owners favored Pompeo. Democrats, Independents, those with self-described moderate beliefs, and voters with incomes less than $50,000 favored Goyle.

    Important dates for voters to remember are these:

    October 13: Election offices begin mailing advance voting ballots

    October 18: Last day to register to vote or change party affiliation for the general election

    October 27: Last day for election office to mail advance voting applications

    October 29: Last day for election office to mail advance voting ballots

    November 2: Election day

    Kansas fourth Congressional district pollKansas fourth Congressional district poll, August 12, 2010

  • Kansas primary election analysis

    At State of the State KS, Fort Hays State University Political Science Professor Chapman Rackaway contributes analysis of the statewide and Congressional races.

    Rackaway notes that the Kansas first and fourth Congressional districts were expected to be very close races, but both Tim Huelskamp and Mike Pompeo won going away with large margins.

    The big message of the night, he writes, is this: “[Jerry] Moran’s win in the Senate primary suggests that the Kansas GOP prefers a more centrist message. But Moran’s win was an anomaly. Kobach, Pompeo, Brownback, and Huelskamp suggest that the state has taken a turn to the right.”

    At National Review Online, Denis Boyles, author of the insightful book — despite its name — on Kansas politics Superior, Nebraska: The Common Sense Values of America’s Heartland, contributes (Mostly) Good News from Kansas. he starts by laying out the essential facts of the Kansas political landscape: “In Kansas, local politics is often made confusing by the powerful presence of very liberal RINOs [Republicans In Name Only]. They constitute a third party, and their half-century of influence has done some nasty work, most recently insuring the victory, twice, of Kathleen Sebelius.”

    Boyles is enthusiastic about the first Congressional district result: “But for people who like their conservatism straight up — no glass, no ice — the best news may be the victory of state Sen. Tim Huelskamp.”

    About the fourth district, Boyles wrote: “In Tiahrt’s district, a very liberal Democrat named Raj Goyle will spend a lot of his own money to try to defeat the GOP’s Mike Pompeo, a local businessman with a military career (he graduated first in his class at West Point) behind him. The Wichita newspaper, a McClatchy thing, has always been loyal to Goyle. Fortunately, fewer and fewer readers will notice.”

    But for the Kansas statehouse, the picture is not as bright. He presents a message he received from an unnamed Kansas legislator, who wrote: “Overall though, I am very disappointed … we did not change the left-wing Republican margin in the House.”

    Boyles concluded: “It’s true that the state senate and the house are both at the mercy of liberal Republicans. RINOs really do tear up the landscape.”

    For results of statewide races and other state offices, click on 2010 unofficial primary election results at Kansas Secretary of State.

  • Kansas fourth district Congressional poll released, surprises within

    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 poll, conducted July 11th through 13th, shows Wichita businessman Mike Pompeo maintaining a narrow lead over his chief rival, Wichita businessman Wink Hartman.

    The support for both of the top two candidates, however, declined as Kansas Senator Jean Schodorf and Wichita businessman Jim Anderson picked up support.

    The poll shows Pompeo at 32 percent, Hartman at 31 percent, Schodorf with 16 percent, and Anderson moving up to garner nine percent of the vote. Latham engineer Paij Rutschman registered one percent in her first appearance in a SurveyUSA poll.

    Undecided voters were nine percent.

    In analyzing the results, SurveyUSA noted that Schodorf has doubled her support over the past three weeks among women and self-described moderate voters. Further, “Today, Schodorf leads among moderates and among the relatively small number of GOP primary voters who oppose the tea party movement, and has effectively tied the front-runners among seniors, pro-choice voters, and those voters who do not own guns. Any outcome remains possible.”

    These results are not surprising, as all along Schodorf, with her moderate positions, has set herself apart from the three male candidates, who are all self-described conservatives.

    The truly surprising — I think we can safely say shocking — results were on the Democratic party side of this contest. Raj Goyle, whose campaign is expected to report a campaign fund balance of some $1.2 million when reports are filed later today, has fallen behind Robert Tillman. SurveyUSA reports Tillman polling 40 percent, while Goyle registers 36 percent. 24 percent are undecided.

    In the same poll three weeks ago, Goyle led Tillman by 42 percent to 32 percent.

    In the Democratic poll, SurveyUSA warns that this is “movement which may or may not be statistically significant.” But the fact that Tillman has been registering such a high percentage of support and is now in the lead must be a huge blow to the Goyle campaign.

    These results are trouble for Democrats nationally, too. Goyle is one of 26 candidates showcased by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in its “Red to Blue” initiative.

    Goyle started television advertising within the past week. Tillman, on the other hand, recently passed out business cards promoting his campaign, not having even the traditional glossy “palm card” for campaign literature. As of today no website for Tillman can be found, although I have noticed yard signs for his campaign.

    Kansas fourth Congressional district poll resultsKansas fourth Congressional district poll results

    Update: A Wichita Eagle profile of Tillman is at Tillman running for Congress to support President Obama’s policies. A profile of Goyle is at Goyle pushes bipartisan solutions.

  • Schodorf – Goyle race might feature reversed roles

    If Jean Schodorf captures the Republican Party nomination for United States Congress from the fourth district of Kansas, the general election contest against likely Democratic Party nominee Raj Goyle might feature a reversal of commonly-held roles.

    That’s because in this year’s session of the Kansas Legislature, Schodorf, as a Kansas Senator, voted for the budget bill that increased spending and required an increase in taxes to support the spending. In this case, the main source of increased taxation is the one cent per dollar increase in the statewide sales tax that will go into effect on July 1.

    At about the same time, as a member of the Kansas House of Representatives, Goyle voted against both bills. Only one other House Democrat voted against the budget bill.

    The usual case, of course, is that Democrats favor increased taxing and spending, while Republicans are generally opposed.

    During this year’s legislative session school spending advocates said that schools have “cut to the bone,” and that without increased school spending, Kansas schoolchildren would suffer. Similar claims were made for people dependent on social services from the state. Kansas Governor Mark Parkinson, a Democrat, agreed. He proposed the spending and sales tax increase (and a cigarette tax increase) in his state of the state address in January, and aggressively promoted both during the session.

    So it would be interesting to see how Goyle would explain his votes to the usual Democrat constituencies such as, say, the Kansas National Education Association (or KNEA), the teachers union.

    More evidence of the reversal of the usual positions of candidates from the two parties comes from analysis of votes during the recently-completed legislative session. In the Kansas Economic Freedom Index for this year, Schodorf scored 18%, resulting in a tie for 27th place among the 40 Kansas Senators. In the House, Goyle’s votes earned a score much more supportive of principles of economic freedom. He scored 67%, ranking 47th in a field of 125 members of the Kansas House.

    On scorecards produced by Kansas chapter of Americans for Prosperity, things again are upside-down. Schodorf’s rating was 25%, while Goyle scored a rating of 60%, which is more in align with AFP’s promotion of limited government and free markets.

    Schodorf’s votes are not out of line with her history. Goyle’s votes this year are more conservative than his past votes, leading us to wonder if there was a bit of election-year window-dressing going on as Goyle prepared for his campaign for Congress.

  • Raj Goyle attacked from left

    In the Kansas House of Representatives this year, Raj Goyle, a Wichita Democrat who is a candidate for that party’s nomination for United States Congress from the fourth district of Kansas made a few votes that were out of character for him, based on his past record.

    In particular, Goyle voted against the bill that increased spending, mostly for schools and social services, and against the bill that raised the statewide sales tax in order to pay for that spending. These votes allowed Goyle to obtain the relatively high ranking of 67% on the Kansas Economic Freedom Index. In rankings for previous years, first produced by the Kansas Taxpayers Network and then Americans for Prosperity-Kansas, his ratings were in 2009: 9%, 2008: 38%, and 2007: 41%.

    Kansas fourth district voters who are interested in a conservative representative in Congress who will work for limited government probably aren’t fooled by Goyle’s apparent election-year transformation. He’s trying, though. As noted earlier this year, Goyle’s campaign website doesn’t mention his party affiliation.

    Not everyone is happy with Goyle’s votes this year in the Kansas legislature. The following letter in today’s Wichita Eagle criticized Goyle from the left for not voting to raise taxes to fund increased government spending. It seems like no one knows the real Raj Goyle and what he believes.

    Explain vote

    We should require that state Rep. Raj Goyle, D-Wichita, who is running for the 4th Congressional District seat, give an explanation as to why he voted against raising our state sales tax. In voting “no,” Goyle showed a callous disregard for helping our public schools and those individuals with disabilities.

    A true Democrat, as was shown by our governor, makes sure that children and vital services for the poor are not left behind in the budget-cutting process.

    What was Goyle’s motive for voting against the sales tax? Is it possible he would do anything to get elected, even if it means abandoning the core principles of his party? Or was his vote one of pure political expediency in trying to fool the public into thinking that he is not a real Obama-type liberal?

    EDWARD A. MYERS
    Newton

  • Pompeo story needs correction, analysis

    A Wichita Eagle news story concerning a candidate for the Republican Party nomination for United States Congress from the fourth district of Kansas has sparked controversy for its reporting of some factual issues, and also for its coverage of the politics surrounding the campaign.

    The story (Big D.C. names host Pompeo fundraiser, May 16 Wichita Eagle) reports on a fundraising event held in Washington DC for Mike Pompeo. The event was held at the home of Robert “Bud” McFarlane, and was attended by, according to the Eagle article, “former federal officials, lobbyists, consultants and political action committees.”

    Readers with long memories may have trouble with the Eagle story when it reports “He [McFarlane] was convicted of lying to Congress about the administration’s plan to sell arms to Iran and divert proceeds to the Contras, a guerrilla movement then waging war against the leftist government in Nicaragua.” As a guest on KPTS public affairs television program “Kansas Week” on Friday, Dion Lefler, the author of the Eagle story, repeated the assertion that McFarlane was convicted of lying to Congress.

    The actual facts are that McFarlane entered a guilty plea. He was not convicted, as reported by a contemporaneous New York Times story: “Robert C. McFarlane, President Reagan’s former national security adviser, pleaded guilty today to four misdemeanor counts of withholding information from Congress and agreed to serve as a prosecution witness in the criminal investigation of the Iran-contra affair.” (“McFarlane admits withholding data on aid to contras,” March 12, 1988 New York Times.)

    There’s a distinction between being convicted of a crime and pleading guilty. While some may view it as a distinction without a difference, it was certainly important at the time, and is part of the historical record.

    The Eagle story also reports on McFarlane’s current involvement in Sudan, specifically with the people of the Darfur region of that country. The United States has called the actions of the Sudanese government against these people genocide. In the Eagle story, congressional candidate and Kansas Senator Jean Schodorf noted that the Kansas legislature voted to divest the state of any business interests with Sudan. McFarlane, however, disputes the contention that he is working for the government of Sudan. Based on her interview with McFarlane, State of the State KS’s Rebecca Zepick reported: “McFarlane said he was disappointed the story was virtually wrong in all elements about his testimony on the arms sale deal and on his work overseas. McFarlane says he works to coach the tribal leaders of Darfur, often the victims of ethnic cleansing, as they prepare to negotiate a peace agreement with the central government.” (Former National Security Advisor Robert McFarlane Speaks Out On Support for Mike Pompeo, State of the State KS, May 17.)

    The politics of the article deserve discussion, such as the role of lobbyists at the fundraising event, and in the campaign in general. Pompeo’s opponents have criticized him for accepting campaign contributions from lobbyists. Part of the problem we have is understanding and even appreciating the role of lobbyists both at the federal and the state government levels. I spent quite a bit of time in Topeka this spring observing the Kansas legislature and surrounding activity, and I came to understand the role of lobbyists more clearly. While it’s true that the popular perception of lobbying — described by one writer as “sinister influence peddling by pressure groups with reckless disregard for the general welfare” — contains an element of truth and is an important area of concern, lobbyists do play useful roles.

    For one, lobbyists play a useful role in gathering and transmitting information to their clients and others. While this is also the job of the news media, many clients require more detailed and specific information and analysis of what’s happening in the legislature or Congress as it regards their interests.

    Second, many lobbyists are simply trying to protect their clients from harm. They are not necessarily seeking anything from government except to not be harmed.

    I also observed times where legislators rely upon lobbyists for technical abilities such as analyzing the effect of a change to legislation on the insurance industry, for example.

    While advocates of limited government such as myself wish for a day when government is so inconsequential that lobbying is neither necessary nor productive, that day is not here. In fact, with the actions and policies of the Obama Administration — Bush’s too, for that matter — government is becoming larger and more intrusive, meaning that lobbyists are going to play a role.

    To simply pretend that lobbying does not exist is naïve and does not take into account the realities of the current political environment. Further, while one of Pompeo’s opponents, Kansas Senator Jean Schodorf, has apparently not received contributions from lobbyists or political action committees in her campaign for the nomination for Congress, she has accepted many such contributions for her Kansas senate campaigns.

    Examination of Schodorf’s campaign finance reports from the last time she ran for office (her campaign for the Kansas Senate in 2008) shows that she received campaign contributions from many political action committees. Some of these PACs are controlled by groups such as the Kansas National Education Association (the teachers union) that also extensively lobby the Kansas legislature for increased spending — which Schodorf accommodates, as she did in the current legislative session. She voted for a budget that increased state spending partly for schools, and voted for the bill that raised the state’s sales tax to pay for the spending.

    A further issue that deserves discussion is the source of campaign contributions. The story itself — certainly the quotes from Pompeo’s opponents — paints a picture of Pompeo raising large sums of money from Washington sources. In a phone conservation, Pompeo said that this characterization is not accurate, that over 80% of the money he’s raised is from Kansas. While the other Republican candidates have not raised much money from outside Kansas, one candidate has: Democrat Raj Goyle, the likely opponent for the Republican nominee in the November general election.

    For Goyle, the proportion of in-state versus out-of-state contributions is roughly reversed from Pompeo’s. A quick analysis performed by myself on Goyle’s campaign contributions through March 31 showed 33% of the dollars coming from donors in Kansas. The remaining donations came from donors outside of Kansas. This analysis is confirmed by analysis available at the website OpenSecrets.org, which showed Goyle’s campaign contributions from Kansas at 32% of his total.

    The same analysis from OpenSecrets.org showed that for the Pompeo campaign, 82% of contributed funds came from donors within Kansas, with 18% from outside of Kansas.

    Interestingly, the OpenSecrets.org analysis showed that the leading metropolitan area that has contributed to Goyle is the Washington DC area, with donors there having contributed about $149,000 to his campaign. The Wichita metro area was just behind at $148,000.

    For the Pompeo campaign, donors in the Wichita metro area contributed $434,000. The next metropolitan area was Chicago at $16,500, and contributions from the Washington metro area were just below $10,000. For Pompeo, this figure does not include contributions from the fund-raising event that is the subject of the Wichita Eagle article.

    While Pompeo is not running against Goyle at this time, the Wichita Eagle has shown a tendency to paint Goyle in the best way possible for someone running for Congress in a fairly conservative district. My post Raj Goyle is not moderate or conservative, even for a Democrat highlighted the Eagle’s characterization of Goyle as a blue dog Democrat, meaning a fiscally conservative Democrat. Such a description would be helpful to Goyle in his campaign against the eventual Republican nominee.

    As my story reported, “fiscally conservative” does not describe Goyle’s past voting record in the Kansas House of Representatives, although this year Goyle voted in a more conservative way. In my new edition of the Kansas Economic Freedom Index, Goyle scores quite well, better than 30 Republican members of the House. Voters will have to judge for themselves whether this change in voting represents a true change in Goyle’s governing philosophy or is merely election-year posturing.

    In the end, the criticism leveled at Pompeo by his election opponents as a Washington insider may simply be a reaction to his success at fundraising not only in Washington but elsewhere. Eagle reporter Lefler, again speaking on the most recent Kansas Week, said “The real irony in all of this, is that four five years ago, having an event like this would have been an absolute plus for a candidate. This was the kind of thing that that showed you have the gravitas to actually go to Washington and actually get some things done.”

  • Kansas Economic Freedom Index updated

    Now that the 2010 session of the Kansas Legislature is over (except for a largely ceremonial final day) and the important votes have been cast, I’ve updated the Kansas Economic Freedom Index.

    Most legislators ranked just about as expected based on their past behavior. But there is at least one notable exception, that being Raj Goyle, a Wichita Democrat who is seeking that party’s nomination for the United States Congress. His rating for this year is 67%. No House Democrat scored higher than that, and 30 House Republicans scored lower.

    Goyle’s votes this year are out of character with his past voting behavior, and must be attributed to preparing to run for Congress against a likely fiscally conservative Republican nominee.

    I’ve received criticism from one lobbyist concerning the way I prepared this index. The specific criticism related to using votes taken in “committee of the whole” action rather than at the time of final action. The lobbyist said that if a person voted for (or against) a bill in final action, that is the only vote that should be used in an index like what I’ve created.

    The problem is that sometimes close votes in the committee of the whole turn into near unanimous votes in final action. The committee of the whole vote, therefore, provides discriminating power that the final action vote does not.

    Further, every recorded vote (not all committee of the whole votes are recorded) are public record, and legislators know that their vote is recorded in the journal of the House or the Senate for anyone to see.

    When I decided to prepare the Kansas Economic Freedom Index I knew, and was advised by several people with knowledge of how legislatures work, that I needed to use preliminary votes or final action votes as needed in order to distinguish legislative positions. After receiving this criticism, I talked to these people and others — members of the legislature, legislative staff members, lobbyists, and others — and confirmed that my actions are correct.

    I’ve also received criticism for some of the bills that I’ve included. For example, I included H. Sub. for Sub. SB 514, better known as the Community Defense Act. This bill includes detailed regulation of the conduct that may take place inside sexually oriented businesses. It also includes limitations on where these businesses may be located, specifically not within 1,000 feet of schools, churches, state-licensed day care facility, libraries, parks, and residences. These types of restrictions on conduct between consenting adults, as well as the centralized planning that the zoning restrictions implement, are contrary to both personal and economic freedom.

  • Raj Goyle votes to end Kansas corporate income tax!

    Did a vote by Raj Goyle last week in favor of ending the Kansas corporate income tax signal a genuine shift in his mindset, or was it merely election-year posturing?

    Goyle, a Democrat who represents parts of east and southeast Wichita, is a candidate for the Democratic Party nomination for United States Congress from the fourth district of Kansas.

    Last week on the floor of the Kansas House of Representatives, Richard Carlson, a Republican from St. Marys and chairman of the House Taxation Committee, offered an amendment to a bill. The main purpose of the amendment was to eliminate the Kansas corporate income tax. The text of the amendment and the recorded vote appear in the journal for March 16, 2010, starting on page 1130.

    The amendment failed on a recorded vote by a margin of 84 to 30.

    Goyle was the only Democrat in the House to vote in favor of the measure. This is out of character for the congressional hopeful. In 2009, according to vote rankings prepared by Americans for Prosperity-Kansas, 18 members of the Kansas House had a more liberal voting record than Goyle, while six had the same score as Goyle. There are 125 members in the House.

    In the 2008 rankings prepared by the Kansas Taxpayers Network, only 11 of 125 members had a lower — meaning farther left on the political spectrum — score than Goyle.

    This vote to end Kansas corporate income taxes also is surprising considering Goyle’s past employment with the Center for American Progress, an organization with a definite liberal agenda. It explicitly advocates for higher taxes to fund increased government spending.

    So as I hope you can understand, I just had to put an astonisher after this headline. Goyle hasn’t responded to an email message requesting comment.

    Update: In 2008 Goyle voted in favor of HB 2762, which proposed to reduce corporate income taxes by several measures. This bill passed the House by a wide margin.