Page 30 - Flathead Beacon // 9.30.15

LIKE I WAS SAYIN’
TWO FOR THOUGHT SAME TOPIC, DIFFERENT VIEWS BOEHNER’S RESIGNATION
KELLYN BROWN
PAC POWER
THE POWER OF SUPER PACS WAS SUPPOSED TO extend the staying power of primary election candidates, perhaps even deep into 2016, per- haps even until next June when Montanans finally cast their ballots more than four months after Iowans.
That may still happen. We could draw some Dem- ocrats and Republicans campaigning across our state for a handful of delegates in an undecided race. But it’s unlikely, especially as weaknesses are exposed in these ever-powerful PACs.
Super PACs (or political action committees) began cropping up after the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2010 Cit- izens United decision, which allowed groups to raise unlimited amounts of money from individuals, corpo- rations and unions to influence elections. In contrast, traditional campaign contributions must abide by a variety of limits.
These PACs were considered a game-changer, with debate limited only to how much they would change the game. And with a large field of presidential candidates this election season, many speculated that more under- performing campaigns could hang around a little lon- ger, relying on the support of these groups to turn their fortunes around.
Then Scott Walker happened.
The Wisconsin governor was the frontrunner in Iowa, home to the first Republican caucus, from Feb- ruary until early August, according to Real Clear Poli- tics, which aggregates public polls. Then Donald Trump passed him. Then Ben Carson did the same.
By Sept. 21, the day he dropped out of the race, Walker had just 4.5 percent of the support in Iowa, good for seventh place, and even less nationwide.
Since announcing his candidacy, Walker’s lasted just 70 days. By some measures, his campaign was the shortest since 1976, according to the Wall Street Jour- nal. A super PAC supporting him sat on more than $20 million (although its unknown how much it had spent) and had planned to focus its advertising on Iowa and New Hampshire. Now it is slowly closing its doors and will return remaining funds to its donors.
Along with Walker, former Texas Gov. Rick Per- ry’s candidacy was long on hype and short lived in the race for president. Perry, who previously ran in 2012, was touted as a new candidate this time around. Super PACS had about $13 million to support his election. It didn’t matter.
These former candidates’ campaigns have already been dissected at length. For Walker, pundits pointed to his series of alleged gaffs. For Perry, he just couldn’t gain traction in a crowded field and voters had been there, done that.
More thoughtful analysis, however, highlighted the limits of super PACs backing weak candidates. These PACs aren’t allowed to coordinate with candidates. More importantly, they can’t pay for campaign staff, travel or office space. Campaign fundraising still mat- ters, and both Perry and Walker were struggling to pay their bills and PACs couldn’t pay them.
Former George W. Bush press secretary Ari Fleischer had helped the Republican National Commit- tee analyze the 2012 GOP election and concluded that rich donors propping up underperforming candidates through Super PACs “weakens our eventual nominee.”
Fleischer told Politico that while he was saddened by Walker’s exit, “it’s healthy because Super PACs alone should not keep candidates in the race if they can’t stay in by themselves.”
The game has changed, but perhaps not as much as we once thought.
BY TIM BALDWIN
Speaker of the House, John Boehner, announced
his resignation. For many Republicans, this is past due. The Republican Party has been seemingly dis- integrating for lack of leadership and significant phil- osophical division. Boehner’s resignation will give Republicans an opportunity to repair itself.
The speaker holds tremendous power: he can keep bills from being heard or voted on; is able to pres- sure the executive branch to sign bills into law; and is instrumental in obtaining needed votes to pass a bill. In some ways, the speaker is able to give life or cause death to the promises our elected representa- tives gave to get elected.
Republicans are starving for a real leader. This is a large reason for Donald Trump’s success. No one is claiming that Trump is a far-right conservative, but he proclaims what most conservatives believe: we need more economic liberty and less government overreach and political corruption. More than that, he seems real. This is what people like and want.
If the House replaces Boehner with someone sim- ilar, many Republicans will be incensed, which will cause the anti-establishment movement to grow. This will help Trump and harm candidates like Jeb Bush. If a better choice is made, it will give credibil- ity to the anti-establishment movement, which will also help Trump. Whatever happens with replacing Boehner, people like Trump are not going away.
BY JOE CARBONARI
The Republican Party has lost control of its
sandbox. Anybody can get elected in their prima- ries. Those most extreme and active vote, the rest mostly don’t. This leads to otherwise extreme poli- cies and practices to become acceptable. This is not conservative of America and its values. It is throw- ing America off-balance and into disarray. It is no way to lead the country, let alone the world.
What to do about it? Help the Republican Party, and the country, work this out. It will entail remem- bering that we all have a responsibility to help to make America work. It is the cost of liberty.
We need to let our friends know, respectfully, when we hear something egregiously unhelpful. Humor helps. Too many votes are cast, particularly in the primaries, that are largely reflexive, incom- pletely thought through. Talking politics is not politically incorrect. It is way to learn, to resolve, to move forward. Our country was founded on it. Our future depends on it. We are all conservatives in that sense. Let’s actually talk a bit and help each other solve some problems.
The Chinese are becoming increasingly com- petitive. Their hackers target us both militarily and economically. The Russians, the Iranians, and others, are capable, too. Cyber-attacks are real and are taking place. Some steal, some disrupt. All do harm. Other threats, nuclear, environmental, and economic are our daily fare. Politics matter. Think about it. Talk about it. It becomes our future.
AMERICAN RURAL DIANE SMITH
SOME SUBSIDIES ARE GOOD SUBSIDIES
M
would be crucial if rural and small towns were to have the opportunity to buy technology services compara- ble to those in our urban communities.
Americans for Prosperity and others that represent anti-government politics had better figure this out and soon: Not all government funding is bad. And in rural and small town American, where so many of your sup- porters choose to live, we often need subsidies to sup- port under-compensatory industries like telecom, healthcare, and transportation.
The unwillingness of certain thought leaders to rec- ognize this single, salient fact is already hurting rural and small towns across our nation. Sadly, this lack of understanding could lead to population declines that are unrecoverable for us.
I’m a proud advocate for rural and small town America. I believe some of our greatest innovators are growing up today in these communities and am amazed at how often these remote places punch above their weight. But, if our access to technology is cut off, we will see rural and small town America suffer in pro- found ways. Our children will leave and our futures will be severely limited.
Mr. Herbst, Americans for Prosperity, and anyone else who believes that all government subsidies are evil – if ever you’d like to learn more about this, I’m hap- pen to discuss it with you, along with ways to make these subsidies work even better and more efficiently. Until then though, please stop screwing it up for the rest of us.
ONTANA’S RURAL AND SMALL TOWNS recently came perilously close to losing the
federal subsidies that support our internet infrastructure upgrades. It all happened when the Montana Public Service Commission, for reasons that appear to be at best loony and, at worst, politically motivated, appeared ready to reject the annual recer- tification of Montana’s “eligible telecommunications companies.”
After a major outcry over the close call, the PSC met again and voted to recertify. According to news reports, the only testimony at the second hearing against recertification was from David Herbst, Mon- tana’s state director for Americans for Prosperity, the conservative political advocacy group founded by exec- utives David and Charles Koch. Mr. Herbst testified that “building telecommunications access for rural Montana communities could be accomplished with- out government subsidies using an R and D budget.”
With all due respect to Mr. Herbst, that may be one of the dumbest statements ever.
Some industries are density dependent. Telecom is one of them. Profitability for telecom infrastruc- ture providers is almost always far higher in densely populated areas than in low-density areas. That’s why Republican Sen. Conrad Burns and other rural sena- tors and representatives from both parties fought relentlessly for provisions in the 1996 Telecom Act ensuring universal telecom access for our rural and remote communities. They knew these subsidies
Learn more about Diane by following her column here or visit American Rural at AmericanRural.org.
30
SEPTEMBER 30, 2015 // FLATHEADBEACON.COM