In recent weeks, both Democratic Sen. Jon Tester and his challenger, Republican Congressman Denny Rehberg, have worked to distance themselves from policies supported by their respective parties and may be unpopular in Montana. It is a competition between the two over who can establish himself as more independent, or (what’s that hollow, overused word?) a “maverick.”
This state is unique in that it is relatively old and, earlier this year, when a young star in the Republican Party, Wisconsin Congressman Paul Ryan, proposed a budget, Rehberg voted against it twice. At the time, he said “I simply won’t support any plan until I know for a fact that Montana’s seniors will be protected.”
Rehberg’s opposition to the plan drew a harsh rebuke from the conservative Wall Street Journal editorial board, which wrote in June “he apparently thinks the way to beat the incumbent (Tester) is by sticking something through the ribs of his supposed friends.”
Nonetheless, the Montana Republican Party released an ad the next month hammering home the point that Rehberg refused to support the Republican budget – the one crafted by Ryan – or “toe the party line.” One of the most controversial aspects of the budget is how it changes Medicare into a system of vouchers for seniors who can then buy health insurance in the private market.
Now that presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney has tapped Ryan as his choice for vice president, the effort to control the narrative over who – Republicans or Democrats – will really gut Medicare has begun in earnest.
Romney has distanced himself from any potential Medicare cuts and accused President Barack Obama’s administration of REALLY doing the cutting – by a whopping $716 billion. The president denies this and argues that his Affordable Care Act provides this much in savings.
Getting to the bottom of this would take someone far more qualified than me, but fact-check organizations say, at one time or another, Obama, Romney and Ryan have all supported cuts/savings to Medicare. The differences are over how to save that money.
Despite any concerns over Medicare, or the Republican budget in general, Rehberg has done more to embrace the Romney/Ryan ticket than Tester has Obama. Following Romney’s announcement, Rehberg pointed out that he had disagreed with Ryan on “a few occasions” but said he was “excited that Governor Romney chose my friend and House colleague Paul Ryan to be our party’s candidate for vice president.”
To be sure, Tester’s baggage is at the top of the ticket: a president with an underwater approval rating in Montana. The senator has released his own advertisement, saying he “took on the Obama administration” by voting against the Wall Street and auto bailouts and supporting the Keystone XL pipeline and the delisting of wolves.
But Rehberg, who has been tying Tester to Obama for months, continues to press his opponent to answer the question: Why does the president deserve to be reelected? And the Montana GOP has now launched a “Tester-Obama Watch” in which it points out that Rehberg “welcomes the presidential and vice presidential nominees of both parties to campaign in Montana” and encourages “Obama to campaign side by side in Montana with Tester.”
For some reason, I doubt that happens.
While much has been made about how Ryan will affect down-ticket voters, the truth is most voters had never heard of him until now. They will be told about all the cuts – at least the unpopular ones – in his proposed budget. But it’s difficult to foresee Rehberg losing a lot of votes by being tied to a vice presidential candidate.
This race is at the same spot it always has been: Rehberg and outside groups tying Tester’s voting record to Obama’s and Tester hoping to make the race about anything but.