Archive → October, 2010
Election 2010: Key Races In Northwest Indiana, And My Predictions
There are A LOT of close, key races in Northwest Indiana this year, and Republicans are poised to take over a lot of seats, whether it is nationally or locally. The first and most important aspect of these elections is the Congressional races. With Democrats having a majority in both the House and the Senate, this is do or die situation across the country, and that includes our own little corner of the world. The second, and this is probably as important to those of us in Indiana, is making sure that our state House and Senate seats are filled with Republicans this year. Not only is that to help ensure that bills get passed that Republicans want, but also because this is a redistricting year, which means we have to stop Democrats from gerrymandering the Districts.
In the House District 19 race, Democrat Shelli VanDenburgh, the incumbent, is in for a tough battle against Republican Dan Klein. VanDenburgh’s campaign website takes an interesting approach on her opening page. Rather than having her immediate emphasis be on what she has done since becoming elected in 2007, or appealing to the reasons that Democrats would be better than Republicans, she has taken an approach of “balance of power”. Her rational is that “It is necessary to have checks and balances and by keeping democrats in control of the house, Indiana will continue to have that” (quoted from her website).
This is interesting. While one can browse through the rest of the site and definitely find her Democratic rhetoric, the fact that the first page, the opening page, is focused primarily on this aspect is in line with what many other Democrats across the country have done: try and separate themselves from the Obama administration and appeal to the Independents and less-liberal Democrats. It’s an intriguing tactic, however I don’t think that it is going to work. Klein has great name recognition, and although the Post-Tribune seems to dislike him (it seems almost on a weekly basis Rich James has something to say about either him or other Republican candidates) most people I have talked to have a favorable opinion of him. As far as the yard sign war, it is definitely a close call, but I’d say just from the areas that I have driven in Klein signs vs. VanDenburgh signs eclipse hers by about ten to fifteen percent. Not to mention that VanDenburgh, for the voters that don’t know anything about the race and are just showing up to do their civic duty, is a longer name and less recognizable than Klein. I predict a Klein win by about the same as the yard sign percentages, about ten percent.
Indiana’s Congressional District 1 is a familiar race between Pete Visclosky, the incumbent Democrat and Mark Leyva, the Republican nominee. There isn’t much to write about, really. While I’ve met Leyva several times and have no personal qualms with him,in this race his lack of exposure has been worse than the past times that he has ran against Pete. I’m not sure why, I don’t know if work is busy or if he couldn’t generate the funds, or whatever, but with all of Pete’s legal troubles and ethics battles, not to mention the hardcore “anti-incumbent” attitude that is floating all of these races, and in an off year election cycle where Republicans traditionally do better, Leyva seems to be noticeably absent, particularly in my neck of the woods (the Hebron, Demotte area). Although yard signs don’t vote, if they did, the ones that I saw would account for a half dozen total votes for Leyva and at least two hundred for Visclosky. My prediction: Pete will run away with at least 20% of the vote.
Shawn Olson, the Republican running against Karen Tallian, the Democratic incumbent who holds down the seat in the 4th District State Senate, is the wild card, so to speak. That district, if one is to look at the map, has been so gerrymandered to favor D’s it’s ridiculous. I was going to manage a campaign early on, before Shawn put his name in the ring, but after the candidate and I looked at the thin strip that reaches out and grabs a chunk of Lake County, we decided against it.
That is what is interesting about this race, and why I included it in my key races piece. I think he actually might have a chance. He’s broken from what has been a problem with other RLC members in the past, which has been not always willing to cooperate with area Republicans, and has been embraced by many area office holders, including Charlie White and Jon Costas, who both spoke at his fundraiser not so long ago. I’ve known Shawn for some time, and I think that this particular seat would benefit greatly from a more libertarian minded individual and budget hawk. Additionally, his brother Eric Olson’s run for the House 1 seat may have helped his name recognition enough to push him over the bubble. Even if voters that don’t follow politics as closely as readers on this site do don’t recognize the difference between Shawn and Eric Olson, that last name is still in people’s minds. My prediction: flip a coin.
Dan Coats, running for the Senate seat that is being vacated by Bayh, is running against Congressional incumbent Brad Ellsworth. I’ve written a little about this race in the past already, and not every conservative minded individual like myself agrees with why I support him. I’ve had some pretty good discussions with buddies at work about why they won’t vote for Coats, and primarily it is focused around the NRA’s endorsement of Ellsworth. That was troubling for me, believe me. One of the primary reasons I’m a Republican is because of my gun rights, and Coats’ bad calls on gun legislation in the past is not something that I’m crazy about. However, if one looks at the grades each received: Ellsworth an A and Coats a C+, and factors in Ellsworth’s votes on health care and other liberal bills (he has voted with the Obama administration almost 90 percent of the time), one can get a feel for why I’m still pulling that hypothetical lever this November. Additionally, in a sea of freshmen Representatives and Senators, we’re going to need some people with experience in the ranks. That’s not to say I want Republicans to fall into some old bad habits: I don’t. But, older, experienced people like Coats can help to teach a lot to what will likely be a group of “newbies”. He can help with PR, he can help reach across the aisle and drag moderate D’s over, sort of like what McCain has done in the past…there are many benefits to putting Coats in that Senate seat. And, like I’ve said in past pieces: Ellsworth may sell himself as a conservative, but he’s still going to be caucusing with Reid (if he wins again). My prediction: the polls will prevail. Coats is up handily in the polls and those will reflect a W in his column.
There will be more on other races, but I thought this might at least kick things off. Any thoughts? Disagreements?
GOP Makes Wise Move With “Repeal and Replace”
Republicans running for Congress have found their perfect groove, at least concerning Obamacare.
Repealing the bill is, in my opinion and many many others, of the utmost importance before it becomes so ingrained into our health care system that repealing the bill becomes almost impossible. As many others, including myself, have written, there are a lot of key components of this health care bill that could have a negative, if not disastrous effect, on both our economy and our lives. Health care reform was necessary, yes. There weren’t too many Republican Congressmen and women that were debating that point. However, what was passed was a dismal bill that didn’t help all that many people, was wayyyy too expensive, and almost assured that it would result in raised premiums for more than half the country.
Democrats gained an A for effort, but a F on substance.
Fortunately, Republicans have realized that these grades could easily apply to them six months after election day. Thus, the slogan “Repeal the Bill” has mutated into “Repeal and Replace”. Republicans seem to be committed to not only repealing this horrid piece of legislation, but applying those free market principles and common sense solutions that they espoused during the health care debates into a new bill. Essentially: putting their money where their mouths are.
This is good! Wonderful! Republicans are realizing that it’s not enough to just say “no”. Republicans should not be the party of “no”. Rather, they should be the party of “smarter alternatives”. Instead of including everyone up to the age of 26 the be on their parents dole, and forcing the insurance companies to honor such insanity, stipulations limiting it to college students would limit the damage this would do. So would allowing health insurance companies to operate like auto insurance companies, by allowing them to cross state lines to sell insurance. Instead of robbing from one social program that is going bankrupt in order to pay for another social program, which I still don’t understand to this day, allow the health insurance companies to sell what would amount in automobile terms as “liability” insurance on ones body, and find a way to do it without punishing people that have those supposed “Cadillac” plans.
There were at least two dozen other great ideas that I have heard throughout the course of the health care debates. Utilize what works, get rid of what doesn’t. Start with a bottom of the barrel, as little as possible approach, and work towards a good bill that does good things. The GOP seems to have realized this, and hopefully this is a good sign for things to come. Maybe we can start this decade out with a majority that will continue into the next.
What Do David Lain and Brad Ellsworth Have In Common?
Quite a bit, actually.
Both of these men either are or have been Sheriffs in their respective counties, both are Democrats that claim to have more conservative platforms, and both are going to be relying on conservatives to help propel them into their respective positions of power.
First, the conservative Democrat angle.
This actually has a lot to do with my last piece on gun control and Second Amendment rights, and the same goes with other areas. I haven’t a doubt in my mind that either one of these two gentlemen are conservative, or the very least have some conservative leaning views. I’m sure they are very pro-family people who have a lot of right views on social stances, and I have no reason to attack them on their personal feelings and/or faith. BUT, and this is a big but, especially in the case of Ellsworth who is running for the Senate seat here being vacated by Evan Bayh, the fact remains that at the end of the day they still are caucusing with Democrats. And again, in the case of Ellsworth, we have his vote on the health care reform bill and other Obama initiatives to peer over and wonder how much we can trust his “I’m tired of the old political games in Washington” message. On an even more local level, one looks at the issues regarding the IRS audit of the Porter County Sheriffs office and wonders how much Lain’s “Trusted and Tested” message holds up. Is that to say that every year we can expect that the Porter County police will be audited because of financial mistakes?
I know what you are all thinking: what does a position like Sheriff or even something like Coroner have to do with politics? What does it matter what party is in those positions?
Just look at Ellsworth as the perfect example. He ran as a conservative Democrat for Sheriff, he ran on that same platform to make it to the House, and now he’s hoping to ride those coat tails all the way to the Senate; even though his voting record doesn’t match his rhetoric. A job like Sheriff or Coroner or even Auditor matter because they are stepping stones for those who want to enhance and move up on that political ladder. Who’s to say that Lain couldn’t become another Ellsworth? I don’t know his political ambitions personally, and perhaps he has the best intentions in the world, maybe he really wants to get up their and change things that he doesn’t like about his party. That may be. However, the theme of this post remains: he would still have to caucus and cut deals with people that are much more liberal than I think even Democrats in Northwest Indiana are.
Now let’s make this clear as well, I don’t claim to be taking a neutral position here for either one of these races, and I’m not trying to persuade Democrats not to vote for either Lain or Ellsworth. It wouldn’t make too much of a difference if I was trying to do that or not; as a Democrat you’ll probably vote for a Democrat because you believe in that party. That’s fine, free country, vote away. I also don’t claim to not have a horse in this race, so to speak. I’m a Republican, a precinct committeeman now, and know Ralph Levi and have met Dan Coats and think they are both stand up people with a lot to offer. I don’t know if one could call this a campaign piece for them, I don’t know what one would call this (although I’m sure there are plenty of distasteful things that people will, be it on the comment section or under their breath, and that’s fine too). I prefer to think of this as a piece primarily targeted at those conservative Republicans who believe that Ellsworth or Lain are clear alternatives or even better picks than what their party has to offer. This is most definitely not the case.
I know that there have been a lot of “amongst political allies” talk regarding both Ralph Levi and Dan Coats, and I know that in some of the cases different people of different political persuasions are friends and so help each other out. That’s fine and dandy, I get that. However, being supportive and voting for a friend doesn’t mean that one should throw his party under the bus by trying to garner support from other political allies. At the end of the day we are all Republicans trying to help out one another. I’m sure we won’t all check all R’s; I will, but I’m sure not everyone will. And that’s fine too. But if you’re a candidate, it’s a bit tacky and distasteful to speak poorly of fellow candidates. And for the non candidates that consider themselves to be conservatives, just remember that the road from county Sheriff to Senate is not one that is all that long…and when your conservative Sheriff gets in Harry Reid’s office, will he still hold YOUR values dear or will he fall in line?
Crazy Idiot Still On the Run: Exercise Your Gun Rights and Protect Yourself
THIS is why I’m a gun carrying Republican.
This man, as of yet unidentified, has been driving around randomly killing people. He shows up at a construction yard, asks the people about honey bee’s, and then shoots two people, killing one. He drives down to a farm in Lowell, right here in my backyard, asks the farmer about honey bees, and then shoots him.
God help him if he stops by my house.
I’m not saying that the death or the shootings would 100% have been avoided if there was a gun on the victim side of the equation. Nor am I saying that there WASN’T a gun on the victim side of these things, I don’t know either way. But what I do know is I felt a whole lot better about going to work last night knowing my wife and child had several weapons at their disposal.
I don’t want to politicize a horrible event, and I hope that even if one reads this piece and disagrees with my assessment of gun ownership that they at least click on the link and if they see somebody who matches this murderers description, calls the authority’s. However, I can’t help but wonder how much more often things like this would happen if our Second Amendment rights weren’t upheld by the narrow margins of the Supreme Court, both recent landmark cases barely squeaking by with a 5-4 vote.
Guns, and the rightful ownership of them, is perhaps the biggest reason I vote Republican, and bust my Democratically voting hunter and gun enthusiast buddies gonads every chance I get for voting for the people that consistently vote against our Second Amendment rights. I’m not saying that all Republicans are flawless with this, or that the NRA doesn’t sometimes support Democrats that are or vote pro-gun. However, for me, the bigger picture is always: who will you caucus with? The Democrats voted in Nancy Pelosi for Speaker of the House, who has been consistently anti-gun. That means that “conservative Democrat” caucuses and cuts deals with her in exchange for their votes. I’m absolutely sure that those pro-gun Democrats have the best of intentions, and that they like to hunt, and like to be able to protect themselves. But, at the end of the day, when the bullet hits the bone, so to speak, will they stand tall on those pro-gun pledges? So few do.
I hope that everybody stays aware while police are looking for the nut job that is still running around.
My own little hope? I hope he made it down a little further south and some hillbilly with a shack in the woods is slowly torturing him and making him pay for his deeds without the option of appeals and lawyers…but hey, that’s just me.
