Posted by
Yubaduck on Saturday, June 07, 2008 2:00:36 PM
Change in DC is going to be a slow and painful process. In the last article I wrote, I discussed an Alaska race to remove an incumbent Republican by a more conservative opponent. Here I will discuss another. I live in Californias 2nd District. Meanwhile, in the 4th congressional district of California which comprises the northeastern portion of California, a bitter race has been brewing. (see map)
John Doolittle represented the district from 1990 to 2008, and because of scandals and lack of support, announced early this year that he would not seek another term. In 2006, he narrowly defeated Democrat Charlie Brown (A retired Air Force Colonel) by just 3 % in a heavily Republican district. Part of his problem was that he was tied to the Abramoff scandal, but much bigger in my book, he has repeatedly sought out earmarks for transportation, defense, and other contracts for his district and his supporters. "But this is how it is done", some would cry. "If we don't have earmarks, then our district won't get the federal money they deserve." That is the problem. Everyone will fight the other guys earmarks as long as we get our money. Until we get people in congress who govern constitutionally, recognizing that it isn't about how many goodies you bring home, but about the government doing its job AND NO MORE, we will never accomplish anything. So Doolittle is done because of corruption, some of which may be legit, some which is probably Democrat invented, but now is the time for new leadership for the 4th District of California.
Charlie Brown is running again this year on the Democrat side, with two main Republican challengers, Doug Ose and Tom McClintock. Strangely, both live outside of the district, McClintock in Ventura County in Southern California, and Ose in the 3rd district just south of District 4. Both are "carpetbaggers", though Ose campaigns on it because he lives so much closer. In California, you don't have to live in a district, just in the state to run.
The difference between the two is stark. According to the Auburn Journal which endorsed Ose,
"Doug Ose is the choice for Republicans voting in the June 3 primary election. Ose is well versed on local issues and pledges to work hard to help local government secure federal funding for needed projects. Small communities like Auburn, Colfax, Lincoln and others would greatly benefit from a regional wastewater-treatment plant. The federal government keeps demanding more from wastewater-treatment plants, and should return more of our own money to pay for the upgrades it demands. Ose pledges to fight for us. Interstate 80 is a vital transportation corridor that links the eastern and western United States. Federal funding must be secured to ease traffic at the Interstate 80 bottleneck in Roseville. Ose plans to fight for that funding. Construction of a Highway 65 bypass also deserves federal funding, as does the development and preservation of freshwater drinking supplies for the growing 4th District. It will take a respected consensus builder like Ose who is committed to working with local elected officials to turn these plans into construction projects."
In other words, because Ose is a player, and will bring home pork, we should vote for him. But that is missing the point. The point is, that if we need a regional waste water plant, the State or Counties should fund it. If we need local water supplies or local highway repair, that is not the Federal Governments job. As for I-80, if we got rid of the earmark system, and doled out funding for Interstate projects on a basis of importance, need, and time, we would have already upgraded the only east west interstate to the Bay area. I have driven on it, it does need major upgrades between Sacramento and Reno. But again, there must be a change of culture. Deal making and back patting cannot be the modus operendi for funding Infrastructure programs. This must change, and one official at a time, we need to elect people who will change it.
Tom McClintock is a hated man. He opposed Pete Wilson and Schwartzenegger on state spending bills and budgets when they were irresponsible. The "Republican Establishment" hates him deeply. Former Governor Wilson says on news10.net:
""Unlike Tom McClintock, Doug Ose gets things done," Wilson wrote. "Doug Ose is the real deal. Instead of rhetoric, he delivers for taxpayers." Wilson and McClintock clashed repeatedly during Wilson's eight years in office. A staunch conservative, McClintock refused to go along with Wilson's tax hike proposal as a way to balance the state's budget deficit. Wilson says he could never count on Tom McClintock. "He was always the first to criticize, but the last to help the team," Wilson said.
In other words, he stood on principle and didn't play ball when Republicans wanted to compromise. I saw the same thing on this years state budget. Republicans were sick of him because he would not back down. They just wanted to pass a budget and get a few crumbs to brag about. He wanted it to be retooled and was "obstructionist" as long as it took for change to occur. Sounds to me like the kind of person we need to elect. Here is more from the Club for Growth:
"Take the issue of pork. As a member of Congress from the Third District, Ose consistently voted for outrageous pork projects and against stripping those projects from appropriations bills. He voted, for example, to spend California’s tax dollars on wood research; peanut competitiveness; asparagus research; and mohair subsidies. Sure, Ose brought home some pork to California but in order to get his few crumbs, Doug Ose had to vote to waste California’s tax dollars on billions of dollars in outrageous pork projects for all 49 other states. If taxpayers in the Fourth District are looking for a leader who will take on the culture of corrupt, wasteful spending in Washington, they should look no further than Tom McClintock. Doug Ose has already shown himself to be nothing more than a follower.
The Auburn Journal is also correct when they say that Ose is a “consensus builder” in the sense that he’d rather go along with the rest of his colleagues than fight for taxpayers. Let us consider what years of Ose’s “consensus building” have wrought: A bloated Farm Bill that doled out subsidies to millionaire farmers, including Doug Ose himself; a brand new government entitlement program in the Medicare Prescription Drug Bill; the McCain-Feingold legislation, trampling on political free speech; and bloated government budgets.
“If voters in the Fourth Congressional District want to know how Doug Ose would vote in Congress, they need not look further than Ose’s six years in Congress representing the Third District,” said Club for Growth Executive Director David Keating. “From 1999 to 2005, Ose was one of the most liberal Republicans in the House, voting for greater government spending, wasteful pork projects, special-interest subsidies; a brand new entitlement program, and even against removing a tax on the Internet. That kind of record may be good enough for the editorial board at the Auburn Journal, but that doesn’t mean voters in the Fourth District have to settle for a big-government Republican.”"
Maybe conservatives are getting it. McClintock won Tuesday 54% to 39%, despite being outspent 2.3 million to 300,000. While Brown leads polls by 4-6% in the district, there is a Republican registration advantage of about 60/40, and so the race is by no means hopeless. The sad thing to me, is that the "mainstream Republicans are largely refusing to endorse McClintock so far, bitter about the toes he has stepped on and the anthill he has stirred up. This is 2. One by one, we can take back our congress, no matter who the president is.
(Quotes from auburnjournal.com, news10.net, and clubforgrowth.com.)
(Other info from congressional and campaign websites for people named, and sacbee.com)