Tag: United States Congress

  • Kansas Senate voting records for Barnett and Huelskamp

    Of the candidates seeking the Republican party nomination for United States Congress from the first district of Kansas, two have extensive voting records based on their service in the Kansas Senate. Both candidates — farmer and Kansas Senator Tim Huelskamp of Fowler and physician and Kansas Senator Jim Barnett of Emporia — promote themselves as conservatives.

    The Kansas Taxpayers Network, and now the Kansas Chapter of Americans for Prosperity, produce legislative scorecards that track legislators’ votes and produce ratings. Legislators who vote for fiscally conservative positions will produce high scores on these tabulations. The accompanying chart shows these two senators’ ratings since they started service, in 1997 for Huelskamp and 2001 for Barnett.

    Kansas Senate vote ratings for Jim Barnett and Tim HuelskampKansas Senate vote ratings for Jim Barnett and Tim Huelskamp

    In another legislative scorecard, the Kansas Economic Freedom Index for this year, Barnett scored 69%, tying for 13th place among the 40 senators. Huelskamp scored 87%, in a tie for second place. This is the first year for the Kansas Economic Freedom Index.

    The other Republican candidates seeking this nomination are educator Sue Boldra of Hays, attorney and mediator Marck Cobb of Galva, Salina commercial real estate executive Tracey Mann, and Senator Brownback chief of staff Rob Wasinger of Cottonwood Falls.

  • In Kansas, Club for Growth PAC taps Pompeo, Huelskamp

    The Club for Growth is a national organization that advances prosperity and economic growth by promoting economic freedom and limited government. Each year it ranks federal lawmakers on how well they follow these principles on its scorecards. (For a look at how current Kansas Congressman and Senate hopefuls Todd Tiahrt and Jerry Moran ranked on the scorecard, see Club for Growth gives slight nod to Tiahrt over Moran.)

    The Club for Growth Political Action Committee (PAC) endorses candidates for the United States House of Representatives and Senate. According to communications director Mike Connolly, the PAC usually endorses from 12 to 20 candidates each election cycle, he said. This year the PAC has endorsed 13 candidates so far, including two in Kansas.

    Connolly said the PAC endorses candidates who share a belief in principles of limited government, economic freedom, and individual responsibility. It does not consider social issues when deciding which candidates to endorse.

    The Club for Growth PAC does not make endorsements in all contests, Connolly said. It looks for candidates who it believes will be solid fiscal conservative leaders when they get to Congress. It also looks for contests where the PAC can have an impact. In districts where no candidates are in step with the Club for Growth’s principles, it makes no endorsement. With 55,000 members across the country, limited government conservatives view a Club for Growth PAC endorsement as a reliable stamp of approval, Connolly added.

    In Kansas, with three open House seats and one open Senate seat, the Club for Growth PAC has made two endorsements. It is possible that the PAC could make other endorsements in Kansas — both the third House district in northeast Kansas and the United States Senate campaigns are vigorously contested — but as the August primary nears, that becomes less likely.

    In the race for Republican Party nomination for United States Congress from the first district of Kansas, the Club for Growth PAC endorsed farmer and Kansas Senator Tim Huelskamp of Fowler.

    David Ray, the Huelskamp campaign manager, said that Huelskamp’s record on fiscal issues like spending and taxes that are important to the Club for Growth PAC is “absolutely stellar.” He also said that a reason the PAC endorsed Huelskamp is that one of his opponents, physician and Kansas Senator Jim Barnett of Emporia, has not upheld principles of fiscal responsibility. It is not known whether Barnett sought the PAC’s endorsement.

    In the fourth district of Kansas, centered around the Wichita metropolitan area, the Club for Growth PAC endorsed Wichita businessman Mike Pompeo.

    Pompeo said that he viewed the Club for Growth PAC’s endorsement as a “good housekeeping seal of approval” for candidates who are committed to limited government, less regulation, and growing economies by getting government out of the way.

    Pompeo said he participated in an interview and that the PAC investigates the backgrounds of candidates thoroughly. He also said that he’s one of the few candidates endorsed by the PAC without a voting record, the usual benchmark for making endorsements. He said that his experience and commitment to the principles of the Club for Growth PAC earned the endorsement.

    He also said that Wichita businessman Wink Hartman, the leading contender besides Pompeo, sought the Club for Growth PAC endorsement.

    At the Club for Growth PAC website, you may read its endorsements of Tim Huelskamp and Mike Pompeo. The Barnett and Hartman campaign offices did not return telephone calls requesting comment for this story.

    Update: Scott Paradise, the Hartman campaign manager, said that Hartman met with the Club for Growth PAC, but did not seek its endorsement. Paradise characterized the Club for Growth PAC as a special interest group, saying the Hartman campaign decided not to seek contributions from such groups. The Club for Growth believes it works to advance prosperity and opportunity for everyone equally through economic freedom and personal liberty.

  • Kansas first district forum lets voters meet candidates

    A candidate forum in Liberal offered an opportunity for southwest Kansas voters to meet and hear from candidates for the Republican Party nomination for United States Congress from the first district of Kansas.

    The candidates are diverse in terms of experience, although most have experience in government, either as elected officials or employees of officials. Among the Republicans, it is sometimes difficult to find a substantive difference in policy positions.

    The Republican 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.

    Former Salina mayor and businessman Alan Jilka appeared at the forum as well. He is the only Democrat seeking nomination.

    As is common, the forum started with opening statements.

    Jilka, as the only Democrat, told the audience that he definitely will be on the November ballot. He said he graduated from Notre Dame University, and worked and studied abroad for four years. He had a college internship with Nancy Kassebaum when she was a United States Senator from Kansas, and later worked for Congressman Dan Glickman of Wichita. He said that he is one of the few people who has worked for both a Republican and a Democrat, adding that we need more people like that in Washington.

    In 1995 he returned to Salina and joined the family furniture business. He has served three four-year terms on the Salina City Council, including serving as mayor. He said he is a pro-life fiscal conservative.

    In his opening remarks, Tracy Mann told the audience he grew up on a farm near Quinter, saying his family has farmed and fed cattle there for over 100 years. He studied agricultural economics at Kansas State University, and said his life changed when he served an internship with current first District Congressman Jerry Moran. After graduating from college he worked for two years in Washington. Returning to operate the family farm was not an option because of other family members, so Mann said he went into business and has worked in commercial real estate since then.

    “I feel like politicians and bureaucrats in Washington are taking this country in the wrong direction,” he said. Backgrounds in business and agriculture are necessary to correct things. He mentioned the “Mann Plan,” the specific things he would do if elected.

    Marck Cobb see he grew up in the small farming community of Galva. After graduating from high school, he went to the Air Force Academy and served for 20 years. He worked in the Soviet Union for two years negotiating contracts on behalf of the United States, and then served at the Pentagon in Washington. He has worked the last ten years as an attorney doing legal mediation from his farm in Galva.

    Cobb said he got into this race because he doesn’t like politics as usual. He said that we need someone who can think and solve problems, rather than just throwing money at problems. He said the first steps we should do to improve our economy are to secure the border against terrorists and illegal immigrants, and bring home our troops from Iraq and Afghanistan.

    Tim Huelskamp, after noting he farms and ranches in Fowler, said he’s often asked why he is running. He said that with ObamaCare, the bailouts, the taxes in the spending, he believes that Washington is headed in the wrong direction. He said we need strong conservative leadership in Washington that reflects our rural, conservative values. He told the audience that he has a strong proven conservative record. He said that because agriculture is the number one industry in the first district, he will be an advocate for agriculture and rural America in Washington.

    Jim Barnett told the audience he grew up on a farm near Reading, but due to allergies and asthma decided farming was not for him, so he decided to become a physician. He served on the Emporia school board for eight years, and in the Kansas Senate chairs the health committee and serves on agriculture, banking and insurance committees. He said we have to control spending, and we have to repeal ObamaCare.

    Rob Wasinger told the audience that tonight is an important conversation regarding what we can do for economic growth and jobs. He traced his experience working in government: first for Gov. Bill Graves, then for Kansas Sen. Jerry Moran on his staff, them for 12 years for Sam Brownback, including five years as his chief of staff. He reminded the audience that in 1950, Kansas had six United States Congressmen, but by 1990 we had only four. He said, this loss of representation can be seen in things like the recent farm bill, which is really more of a nutrition bill to satisfy urban interests. Farmers were hurt in the process, he said.

    The new Homestead act, which Wasinger says is the main plank of his platform, would help revitalize the economy of western Kansas.

    Sue Boldra said that balanced budget, term limits, and tax reform are at the top of her to-do list. She told the audience that she was born and raised in McPherson County, and after graduating from college she and her husband moved to Hays. They operated a hunting and fishing store in Hayes. She has taught history and government for 33 years, and now teaches teachers how to teach government.

    She said we have many problems in our government today — health care, cap and trade must be stopped, and securing our borders.

    The first question asked how a rural representative in Congress will be heard among all the urban representatives. Also, how can the “eastern” Kansas candidates assure “western” Kansas voters that they will be fairly represented?

    Mann said that it will be important to work with other representatives who represent rural districts. Huelskamp noted that his home has always been in Fowler, and that he has chosen to make his home in rural America. Barnett said that if he wins the primary, he will commit to spending two days a week traveling the country to help elect like-minded representatives. Wasinger said what’s been missing is coalition building, and that will be necessary in Washington. Boldra said that her experience as an educator will help her show others how important are Kansas products.

    The second question asked about the candidates’ views on abortion and exceptions, the the candidate is pro-life.

    Cobb said that he is pro-life, but realizes there are exceptions and respects others’ decisions. Huelskamp said the right to life, as mentioned in the Declaration of Independence, is the most important right of all. He didn’t address the question about exceptions, but noted that he has the endorsement of Kansans for Life. Barnett said he is 100% pro-life, and didn’t answer the question about exceptions. Wasinger — noting that he has ten children — said he is pro-life, but he also didn’t address any exceptions. Boldra said she is pro-life and pro-family, and didn’t address exceptions. Jilka said we must protect life from conception to natural death, and also didn’t address exceptions. Mann said he is pro-life without exception.

    A question asked about national energy policy and its impact on western Kansas.

    Huelskamp said his energy strategy is “all of the above,” meaning support for diversified energy sources. He said we need more energy produced, noting his support for expansion of a coal-fired electrical plant in western Kansas. He said that the Obama Administration’s energy policy, including cap-and-tax, will be devastating to the economy of western Kansas. Barnett said he supported the coal-fired plant as well as diversified energy sources such as nuclear, wind, solar, and conservation, and that we need to become energy independent. Wasinger said the stakes in this are huge, and that Obama is willing to go after independent oil and gas producers. Boldra said that energy needs to be reliable and affordable, and also needs to consider the environment. Jilka said there are two things to consider: how we fuel our vehicles, and how we generate electricity. He said we must free ourselves from our addiction to foreign oil, and that biofuels could help in this regard and also help the Kansas economy, and that other alternative energy could provide many jobs in Kansas. Mann said we need to have a comprehensive energy policy in place that reduces our dependence on foreign oil. He also advocated a diversified energy strategy, noting how important it is to our economy. Cobb agreed with the positions taken by others, and also said that when considering alternative sources of energy, we need to be sure we consider the impact on the economy.

    A question asked how high a priority would Highway 54 be for you in Congress? All agreed that this highway is very important and that it would be a top priority.

    Another question: What is your solution to illegal immigration?

    Wasinger said that our immigration system is broken to the point where it is a national security emergency. He said we need more troops on the border, and that we need to get serious about border security. Boldra said that we are a nation of immigrants, but immigrants should be legal. She said that we need to import certain types of skilled workers such as doctors and professionals, and she supports building a wall at the Mexican border. Jilka said “we can’t deport our way out of this problem.” He said we need to secure the border, punish employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants, established an earned citizenship program, and encourage Mexico to help its own people. Mann said that first we must secure our border. Then, he said we must develop an effective process to handle legal immigration. Cobb said we need to enforce existing laws, and that technology can help secure the border. For illegal immigrants that are already present in the U.S., he said that we have to create alternative means to citizenship for these people, adding that part of the reason they’re here is our fault for not enforcing the laws. Huelskamp said the immigration problem is an example of what’s wrong in Washington. We’ve known of the problem for many years, he said, but politicians and bureaucrats do not want to do anything until comprehensive immigration reform — which he called amnesty — is passed. He said he does not support amnesty, and he supports enforcement of our laws, including securing the border. Barnett said he has nothing against immigration, but he is opposed to illegal immigration. He said that nothing will be resolved until the border is secure.

    A question on health care asked if the candidates see that the current health care plan needs reform, and if so, what changes need to be made?

    Answering first, Boldra said that the Kansas first Congressional district has more hospitals than any other congressional district. She said that health care must be affordable, accessible, and portable. She warned about the unintended consequences that may accompany the current overall plan. Jilka said we must try to control health care costs. He said we need to give ObamaCare a chance to work, keeping its best features and revising what is found not to work. Mann said we must repeal ObamaCare, saying it will kill our rural hospitals. He said the real problem is costs, saying that tort reform, allowing the purchase of insurance across state lines, and access to health care in rural Kansas are the important issues. Cobb expressed concern that we do not understand the consequences of the recently passed health bill. Huelskamp said he believes the ObamaCare proposal is unconstitutional. He supports the state of Kansas joining about 20 other states in suing to force the repeal of the recently passed a bill. Barnett said he supports repeal. He also mentioned the problem in recruiting physicians in western Kansas and said that he believes that the recently passed law will make this problem even worse. Wasinger agreed with repealing ObamaCare, and said that it is more focused on urban areas rather than rural concerns.

    A question asked what is the most important issue facing small business today and how would you solve this issue?

    Jilka said that we need to focus on tax relief for small businesses, not for the wealthiest people. Mann said that politicians and bureaucrats who don’t have a business background are a problem when they try to create policies for business. He said that taxes and regulation are punishing job creation. He said we need to extend the Bush tax cuts which are set to expire this year and also to kill the death tax. Cobb agreed that we need to reduce the tax and regulatory burden. Huelskamp said he has a pro-business voting record. He said that candidates don’t run on a platform of increasing taxes and regulation, but when politicians get to Washington, they sometimes say one thing but do another. He said we need leaders who understand that the best decisions are made by businesses themselves, not by by politicians in Washington. Barnett agreed that regulation is stifling growth, and that regulations need to be kept to a minimum and that they need to be fair and predictable. Wasinger proposed a simple reform, he said: that all regulations have to go to Congress for an up or down vote. Boldra agreed that the uncertainty of regulation harms business.

    Starting off the round of closing remarks, Boldra asked the audience members if they are happy and secure with the performance of government. Criticizing the elite environment — the backroom deals and cronyism — that she said has become our nation’s capital, she said we need citizen legislators to take control of our future. She said we need to “build that wall of separation” between the federal government and the states. Saying that she is applying for this position, she believes her experience as an educator, businesswoman, and a farmer are her qualifications.

    Cobb said the important issues are the economy and jobs with agriculture being a component of this, education, and national security. He said the current administration simply throws money at these issues without thinking through the consequences of this action, adding that we need to use existing tax revenue more efficiently instead of raising taxes. He criticized the other campaigns for taking out-of-state money, saying this is politics as usual.

    Huelskamp criticized wasteful spending in Washington, saying it’s been successive congresses and administrations that don’t understand that we can’t spend more money than we take in. He said that we need people in Washington who understand the values of rural Kansas, balancing our budgets, protecting our families, working hard, and not relying on government. He said this is the perspective he would like to take the Washington. He said he has the best record on fiscal issues, and that he does not vote for tax increases.

    Mann said — twice for emphasis — that “politicians are killing the American dream.” He promoted his extensive experience with business and agriculture. He said that we need fresh faces and new ideas, and that promoting politicians from within would not achieve this. He referred again to the “Mann plan” that is available on his campaign website. He said that politicians get elected with good intentions, but that that may change over time. He said that his connection with his father and his farm will help him keep grounded.

    Barnett said that when he considered running for this position, he called Congressman Moran and asked them what the important issues were, and Moran said agriculture and health care. Barnett said that his background is in agriculture and health care. He said he planned to live in Kansas. He said we need to elect leaders who can govern and solve problems and can work with each other to develop conservative solutions. He said that elected officials are not listening to constituents.

    Wasinger — again noting he has ten children — said this race is about our children, and we are burdening them with debt that will be repaying for many years. Obama’s social spending programs, he said, are out of control. The new Homestead act and its provisions such as first time home purchase credits, tax incentives for business startups, and student loan forgiveness will help encourage economic growth in the first district. He said his focus is jobs and economic growth.

    Jilka, the lone Democrat, said that he is in the political mainstream and has experience working with people from all across the political spectrum. He promoted his business experience, living abroad for four years, working in Washington, and experience in local government, as his qualifications.

  • Tiahrt poll indicates closer Kansas Senate contest

    A new poll shows Todd Tiahrt gaining ground on Jerry Moran in the contest for the Republican Party nomination for the United States Senate from Kansas.

    The poll, which was conducted on behalf of the Tiahrt campaign, showed Moran with 37 percent and Tiahrt with 34 percent. 26 percent were undecided.

    These results indicate a much closer contest than other polling. As the Wichita Eagle’s reporting noted, “Campaigns often don’t release internal poll results. It should be noted that they are undertaken by partisan polling operations and should be viewed in that context.”

    Tiahrt also picked up an endorsement from radio talk show host and Fox News personality Sean Hannity. Hannity said “Sarah Palin endorsed him; Mark Levin endorsed him. A great protector of our Constitution, if you are out in Kansas, you’ve got to pay attention to Todd Tiahrt. He is pro-family, pro-Second Amendment. This is the kind of commonsense conservative we need in the US Senate. He’s never voted for a tax increase; He fought to end wasteful spending coming out of Washington. That’s the kind of guy we’re looking for.”

  • Financial reform bill as bad as can be

    The United States financial reform legislation that just passed through conference committee is just about the worst possible bill that could emerge. In its analysis, The Wall Street Journal concluded “perhaps the best summary is to hail Dodd-Frank as the crowning achievement of the Obama ‘reform’ method. In the name of responding to a crisis, the bill greatly increases the power of politicians and regulators without addressing the real causes of that crisis. It makes credit more expensive and punishes business without reducing the chances of a future panic or bailouts.”

    Others are critical of the bill, too. The Cato Institute’s Mark A. Calabria wrote “That thin semblance of reform will let Congress and the Obama administration claim they brought Wall Street to heel. But by dodging all the hard issues, this ‘reform’ makes it likely that the next crisis will put the last one to shame.”

    Later Calabria wrote “Perhaps it should come as no surprise that Sen. Christopher Dodd and Rep. Barney Frank, the bill’s primary authors, would fail to end the numerous government distortions of our financial and mortgage markets that led to the crisis. Both have been either architects or supporters of those distortions. One might as well ask the fox to build the henhouse.”

    Investor’s Business Daily agrees: “The two sponsors, Rep. Barney Frank and Sen. Chris Dodd, are as much responsible for the financial crisis as any two people in America. Yet, we’re now supposed to believe that they, and their flailing party, which can’t even meet its legal obligation to produce a budget, have now fixed our financial system.”

    We ought to be wary of government — who many believed caused the crisis — claiming that it can fix the present crisis and prevent another. Liberals believe that the right regulations, when enforced by smart and dedicated federal regulators, can prevent the usual failure of government regulations. But writing earlier this year in The Wall Street Journal Allan H. Meltzer explained why this won’t happen: “This is because regulation is static, while markets are dynamic. If markets don’t circumvent costly regulation at first they will find a way later. … Regulation often fails either because regulators are better at announcing rules than at enforcing them, or because the regulated circumvent the regulations.”

    While some might proclaim that free markets produce perfection, Meltzer wrote: “Capitalists make errors, but left alone, markets punish such errors.”

    We’re not leaving markets alone. Instead, we’re stepping up the intervention.

    Triumph of the Regulators

    The Dodd-Frank financial reform bill doubles down on the same system that failed.

    President Obama hailed the financial bill that House-Senate negotiators finally vouchsafed at 5:40 a.m. Friday, and no wonder. The bill represents the triumph of the very regulators and Congressmen who did so much to foment the financial panic, giving them vast new discretion over every corner of American financial markets.

    Chris Dodd and Barney Frank, those Fannie Mae cheerleaders, played the largest role in writing the bill. Congressman Paul Kanjorski even offered a motion to memorialize it as the Dodd-Frank Act. It’s as if Tony Hayward of BP were allowed to write new rules on deep water drilling.

    The Federal Reserve, which promoted the housing mania and failed utterly in its core mission of monitoring Citigroup, will now have more power to regulate more financial institutions and more ability to dictate the allocation of credit.

    Continue reading at The Wall Street Journal.

  • Schodorf poll shows closer Kansas fourth district contest

    Last week’s poll concerning the Republican Party nomination for United States Congress from the fourth district of Kansas showed Mike Pompeo making big gains to slightly overtake Wink Hartman, with Jean Schodorf and Jim Anderson far behind. A striking feature of that survey was the low number of undecided voters, just eight percent.

    Now Schodorf has released a poll with results that, while producing the same ordering of candidates, show a closer race between the top three candidates, with a much larger number of undecided voters. The results, along with the SurveyUSA results from last week, are as follows:

                Schodorf Poll    SurveyUSA
    Pompeo          20%              39%
    Hartman         19%              37%
    Schodorf        14%               9%
    Anderson         2%               6%
    Not sure        45%               8%

    Schodorf’s poll was conducted on June 18 and 19, while the SurveyUSA study announced last week was conducted from June 21 through 23.

    SurveyUSA included 609 respondents who SurveyUSA determined to be likely voters in the August primary election. Its 95 percent certainty interval is 4.1 percent. The Schodorf effort, according to the press release, consisted of 400 personal interviews conducted with a 95% level of confidence. No interval was given for that confidence level.

    Jayhawk Consulting Services conducted the poll for the Schodorf campaign.

    The SurveyUSA poll starts with a Random Digit Dialed (RDD) sample provided by a third party. Respondents are then asked questions to determine if they are likely primary voters. In an email response from candidate Schodorf, she said that her poll included only voters who voted in two of the last three primary elections. This information can be determined from publicly-available voter records.

    The press release for the Schodorf campaign poll criticizes the methodology SurveyUSA uses in its polls. According to Jim Yonally, president of the polling firm: “We use well-educated adults, who are experienced callers. We talk to people one on one to get a better feel for what they are thinking. It’s my understanding the media poll uses a recorded voice to ask questions.”

    SurveyUSA feels that its automated response polls are accurate and publishes a report card of its results compared to other polling firms. An interview with Jay Leve, SurveyUSA CEO, provides more insight into SurveyUSA and its methods. He would not comment on this specific poll and the criticisms leveled by Schodorf’s pollster.

    The Republican Party 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.

  • Olathe Republican straw poll produces wins by Tiahrt, Yoder

    Yesterday’s Olathe Republican Party picnic featured a straw poll that provided insight into statewide and local races as Kansas nears its August 3rd primary. The annual event is very popular, and this year 430 people paid the $2 fee to participate in the straw poll.

    Martin Hawver, dean of Kansas Statehouse reporters, describes the importance of the event: “The picnic/poll has been closely watched in recent years because Olathe is a conservative bastion and it tends to bring Republican politics into a comfortably conservative venue from which the party’s internal strife can be measured.”

    Voters vote only once in the poll.

    In the straw poll for the Republican Party nomination for United States Senate from Kansas, Todd Tiahrt outpolled Jerry Moran 315 to 112.

    Tom Little of Mound City and Bob Londerholm of Overland Park, little-known candidates who filed close to the June 10th deadline, each received two votes.

    Tiahrt’s numbers were undoubtedly boosted by the 69 folks who made a 178-mile bus trip from Wichita to Olathe courtesy of the Tiahrt campaign. Subtracting these leaves Tiahrt with a still-large victory margin of 246 to 112. These results are a boost to the Tiahrt campaign, as it is thought that northeast Kansas is a key battleground in this contest. Hawver’s caveat that Olathe is a conservative bastion must be kept in mind, as Tiahrt makes an explicit appeal to conservative voters.

    Both Tiahrt and Moran — along with many members of their campaign staffs — attended the event. Moran had to leave the picnic before the speechmaking started to attend to his mother, who was recently diagnosed with leukemia. Kansas Senator Karin Brownlee, an Olathe Republican, spoke in Moran’s place. Tiahrt spoke in person, and his speech was enthusiastically received by the audience.

    It is commonly thought that the winner of this August Republican primary election will cruise to victory in the November general election.

    In the contest for race for the Republican Party nomination for United States Congress from the third district of Kansas, the straw poll showed these results:

    Kevin Yoder 156
    Patricia Lightner 117
    John Rysavy 55
    Dan Gilyeat 52
    Jean Ann Uvodich 23
    Craig McPherson 7
    Garry Klotz 5
    Dave King 0
    Jerry Malone 0

    The winner of the primary will face the winner of the Democratic party primary, either Stephene Moore (wife of current officeholder Dennis Moore) or Thomas Scherer.

    In these straw polls, it is common for campaigns to pay the poll fee ($2 for this poll) for their supporters. In this case, the Yoder campaign went a little further, distributing free coupons that, when turned into a Yoder campaign representative, would let a family avoid paying the $10 admission fee. It is not known how many of these tickets were used, and other campaigns may have done the same.

  • Kansas fourth district Congressional candidates answer individual questions

    Last week’s forum of candidates for the Republican Party nomination for United States Congress from the fourth district of Kansas featured a set of questions tailored individually for each of the four candidates who participated.

    The candidates for this nomination (and their campaign websites) are Wichita businessman Jim Anderson, Wichita businessman Wink Hartman, Wichita businessman Mike Pompeo, and Kansas Senator Jean Schodorf. Election filing records maintained by the Kansas Secretary of State indicate that Paij Rutschman of Latham has filed for the Republican Party nomination, but little is known about this candidate at this time, and Rutschman did not appear at this event.

    Hartman answered his question first. The question and his response are covered in my article Hartman state tax issue still a little bit murky.

    Anderson’s question asked when was the last time he voted in any primary election. Anderson answered “2008, I believe.” He added that “the primary is the most is the most important election” and that he would defeat Raj Goyle in the general election. He asked the audience to examine the candidates, their history, what they’ve done, and how they’ve conducted themselves.

    He used the opportunity to recommend voters choose a candidate who will follow the Constitution, “the one in my pocket that they’re not using right now in Washington.”

    Schodorf was asked about the recently-passed tough Arizona immigration law. Would you support such a law? Schodorf said that she understood why Arizona enacted the law, saying Arizona was forced to do it due to the federal government’s inaction. She said the federal government should have been enforcing a strong border. She said we need to help Mexico keep the border safe so that guns, drugs, people, and money do not come here. She told the audience she has voted for tough laws against the trafficking of illegal immigrants.

    She added that she supports using the National Guard to secure the border.

    Pompeo’s question concerned a Wichita Eagle article covering a Washington fundraiser for him that was attended by lobbyists. Would lobbyist contributions affect your voting, and how would we know?

    Pompeo noted that he had four times as many Kansas contributors as the other candidates combined, a source of pride for him. While he said he has accepted contributions from political action committees, other candidates also sought such contributions, but were not successful in obtaining them. He cited his endorsement by the Kansans for Life PAC, which was sought by the other pro-life candidates for the nomination. He also mentioned his endorsement by the Club for Growth, which was sought by one of the other candidates, he said.

    In rebuttal, Anderson said that yes, PAC money will affect decisions and votes, that PACs want favors from legislators.

    Analysis

    In checking the candidates’ responses, I was not able to verify that Anderson voted in the August 2008 primary election in Sedgwick County. In an email response to my question, Anderson wrote that he “truly wasn’t sure if I had voted in the 2008 Primary as I was deeply involved in opening my business, PostNet.” He’s right: listening to the recording of the forum, he was hesitant in his answer.

    Regarding contributions from political action committees, I would recommend that voters consider the purpose or goal of each PAC. If the goal of the PAC is to increase taxes and spending — particularly when for the exclusive benefit of its members — voters should take that into account if they are interested in fiscally conservative candidates. Other PACs and organizations like the Club for Growth seek growth, prosperity, and economic freedom for everyone equally.

  • Club for Growth gives slight nod to Tiahrt over Moran

    Of the groups that analyze legislators and their votes, the Club for Growth produces a scorecard that focuses on votes relating to economic growth.

    The Club for Growth describes itself as “a national network of thousands of pro-growth Americans, from all walks of life, who believe that prosperity and opportunity come through economic freedom. We work to promote public policies that encourage a high growth economy and a swift return to America’s founding principles primarily through legislative involvement, issue advocacy, research, training and educational activity.”

    Each year the Club for Growth produces a scorecard for both the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate that ranks members on their votes, based on the Club’s judgment of which votes distinguish between legislators who believe in pro-growth policies and those who don’t.

    The Club warns of limitations of scorecards like these, including my own Kansas Economic Freedom Index: “A study of roll call votes on the floor of the House and Senate and legislative actions is just that. It can not account for a lawmaker’s work in committee, advocacy in his party’s caucus meetings, and effectiveness as a leader in advocating pro-growth policies.”

    That caveat aside, let’s look at how the Club ranked members of the Kansas House delegation, particularly Todd Tiahrt and Jerry Moran. These two are candidates for the Republican party nomination for the U.S. Senate. It is commonly thought that the winner of this August Republican primary election will cruise to victory in the November general election.

    One of the themes in the election — promoted especially by the Tiahrt campaign — is who is the most conservative candidate. So the Club for Growth scorecard is an important measure for someone promoting conservative, pro-growth credentials.

    On the Club’s scorecard for 2009, Tiahrt earned a rating of 90 percent, which ranks him 64th among members of the U.S. House according to Club for Growth’s criteria.

    Moran scored 85 percent, which ranks 94th.

    (A higher rating means more votes in alignment with the Club’s positions. Other Kansas House members are the second district’s Lynn Jenkins, a Republican from Topeka, who scored 87 percent, ranking 83rd, and Democrat Dennis Moore of the third district in northeast Kansas, who scored four percent with a ranking of 297th. On the Senate rankings, Sam Brownback scored 85 percent, ranking 24th among the 100 members of the Senate. Pat Roberts scored 93 percent, ranking 19th.)

    Is this difference between Tiahrt and Moran significant? That question, of course, must be answered by each voter. To help voters decide, I examined the Club’s scorecard and listed the votes where the two Congressmen voted differently. This is not a comprehensive examination of their voting records that would find all votes that were different. It only looks at the votes in the Club’s scorecard that are different.

    The Club for Growth’s scorecard looked at 24 votes. Following are the votes where Tiahrt and Moran voted differently. Information on the bills is from Govtrack.us.

    H.R. 12: Paycheck Fairness Act
    “To amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to provide more effective remedies to victims of discrimination in the payment of wages on the basis of sex, and for other purposes.”

    Moran voted in favor of the Club’s position, while Tiahrt was absent for this vote. On a scale of one to ten that the Club uses to gauge the relative importance of votes, this bill was given a weight of one, meaning that it was judged relatively unimportant, relative to others.

    H.R. 2: Children’s Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2009
    “To amend title XXI of the Social Security Act to extend and improve the Children’s Health Insurance Program, and for other purposes.”

    Tiahrt voted in favor of the Club’s position, while Moran voted against it. This bill was weighted four on the scale of one to ten of relative importance.

    H.R. 3435: Making supplemental appropriations for fiscal year 2009 for the Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save Program
    “Makes emergency supplemental appropriations of $2 billion for FY2009 and FY2010 to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) of the Department of Transportation (DOT) for the Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save Program (Cash for Clunkers Program)”

    Moran voted for the Club’s position, while Tiahrt voted against it. This bill was weighted two on the one to ten scale of relative importance.

    H. Res. 806: Providing for the concurrence by the House in the Senate amendment to H.R. 1035, with an amendment
    “Sets forth the rule for consideration of the Senate amendment to H.R. 1035 (Morris K. Udall Scholarship and Excellence in National Environmental Policy Amendments Act of 2009)”

    Tiahrt voted in favor of the Club’s position, while Moran voted against it. This bill was weighted one on the scale of one to ten of relative importance. The meaning of this resolution is obscure.

    H.R. 3639: Expedited CARD Reform for Consumers Act of 2009
    “To amend the Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act of 2009 to establish an earlier effective date for various consumer protections, and for other purposes.”

    Tiahrt voted in favor of the Club’s position, while Moran voted against it. This bill was weighted two on the scale of one to ten of relative importance.

    These are the only votes that differ between the two candidates. The Club’s scorecard also takes into account other factors, such as points awarded by the National Taxpayers Union (Tiahrt earned five; Moran three), and points awarded for not sponsoring anti-trade bills (Tiahrt and Moran both earned four points)

    The scorecard also includes points awarded based on the Club’s RePORK Card, which scores legislators on how they voted on legislation that the Club considers to be pork-barrel spending. Tiahrt’s score of 29 percent earned him zero points, while Moran’s score of 96 percent earned two points.

    The scorecard also separately considered H.R. 1321: Healthy Americans Act, “To provide affordable, guaranteed private health coverage that will make Americans healthier and can never be taken away.” Tiahrt and Moran voted the same on this measure.

    While Tiahrt scores higher overall than Moran on the Club’s scorecard, it is not a consistent trend across all votes and measures.