Laffey vs Chafee. "The party of Reagan" by Pat Toomey.

[nick]

From the WSJ:

Describing his 1976 challenge to incumbent Republican President Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan wrote, "It was time to scale back the size of the federal government, reduce taxes and government intrusion in our lives, balance the budget, and return to the people the freedoms usurped from them by the bureaucrats."

Reagan helped define the mission of the Republican Party. By re-establishing limited government as the central principle of the GOP, he laid the groundwork for the political revolution that bears his name. Almost 30 years later, the Republican Party is at a similar defining moment. Once again, challengers to certain Republican incumbents are needed to help restore limited government to its rightful place at the center of the Republican agenda.

Today, the Club for Growth PAC will endorse Steve Laffey, the Republican Mayor of Cranston, R.I., in his primary challenge against Sen. Lincoln Chafee. Steve Laffey is a pro-growth, Reagan Republican. Sen. Chafee epitomizes the GOP's waning commitment to limited government and economic freedom.

Sen. Chafee has consistently opposed tax cuts. Citing the federal deficit, he opposed the Bush tax cuts that have generated our powerful economic expansion. But his concerns about deficits don't extend to government spending. Bills he has sponsored would add nearly a half-trillion dollars in new spending over 10 years. The National Taxpayers Union gave him a dismal 49% rating for his profligacy with taxpayer money. A close ally of organized labor, he opposes school choice, and just last month voted for a minimum-wage increase. A recent Boston Globe profile describes his ideology as "well-suited for a centrist Democrat."

Despite his liberal record, Sen. Chafee is warmly embraced by the Republican Party establishment which dutifully enforces an unprincipled, though ironclad, mutual-defense agreement that ignores ideology.

Steve Laffey makes a stark contrast. After an inspiring climb from rags to riches, he returned to his hometown to run for mayor and rescue the city of Cranston from impending insolvency. As mayor, Mr. Laffey ruthlessly attacked the mismanagement that had caused Cranston's problems. He cut costs, established financial controls, rooted out waste and took on bloated union contracts in the courts--as well as in the court of Rhode Island public opinion. Today, Cranston has recovered its investment-grade credit rating and the voters there have re-elected him twice. This in a city where only 14% of voters are Republicans!

As a senator, Mr. Laffey would cut wasteful spending, especially corporate welfare; make the Bush tax cuts permanent; expand international trade; reform insolvent entitlements and fix broken tort laws. In short, he's precisely the kind of pro-growth, limited-government Republican the Senate badly needs more of.

After 10 years of controlling Congress, Washington Republicans have an identity crisis. It was Republicans who gave us a farm bill that only a Soviet central planner could love; a campaign-finance reform bill that expands government's unconstitutional restrictions on speech; a prescription-drug entitlement program that Lyndon Johnson could only have dreamed of; and a transportation bill with more than 40-times as many pork projects it took to earn Reagan's veto. So, we ask a fair question: Is Reagan's vision of limited government--the fundamental principle that brought Republicans to power--still part of the Republican identity, or has it been abandoned in favor of the seductive power of controlling unlimited government?

The fate of two bills before Congress, and a few Republican primaries, might help to answer the question. After years of spending increases, Republicans are now struggling to pass--over the opposition of Sen. Chafee and other so-called moderates--a tiny, mostly symbolic, cut in the growth of future federal spending. And if that were not enough, the Chafee cabal is attempting to block a bill extending the very tax cuts that have given us economic expansion.
The party of Reagan has been reduced to this--which is why it's time for Laffey vs. Chafee, the first skirmish in a very important battle.

Mr. Toomey is president of the Club for Growth.

[Joe Republic]

Here's hoping that Laffey is just as successful as Toomey was.

[Frodo]

We should start some sort of a PAC to help Laffey defeat Chaffee -and then withdraw our financial support the minute Laffey wins the Republican nomination, giving it to whichever Democrat wins his party's nomination. 

[nick]

We should start some sort of a PAC to help Laffey defeat Chaffee -and then withdraw our financial support the minute Laffey wins the Republican nomination, giving it to whichever Democrat wins his party's nomination. 

You sick bastard...

Where do I sign up. 

[TheresNoMoney]

Hopefully there'll be some new polls out on this race soon.

[Joe Republic]

We should start some sort of a PAC to help Laffey defeat Chaffee -and then withdraw our financial support the minute Laffey wins the Republican nomination, giving it to whichever Democrat wins his party's nomination. 

You sick bastard...

Where do I sign up. 

You guys would prefer to see a sensible moderate with an independent streak and a conscience be replaced by a typical New England Democrat?

[nini2287]

We should start some sort of a PAC to help Laffey defeat Chaffee -and then withdraw our financial support the minute Laffey wins the Republican nomination, giving it to whichever Democrat wins his party's nomination. 

You sick bastard...

Where do I sign up. 

You guys would prefer to see a sensible moderate with an independent streak be replaced by a typical New England Democrat?

Call me a DINO or Republican Apologist, but I for one do not.  I would rather be in the minority with another Chafees in the Repulican party than be in the majority with a bunch of "New England Democrats".

[Frodo]

We should start some sort of a PAC to help Laffey defeat Chaffee -and then withdraw our financial support the minute Laffey wins the Republican nomination, giving it to whichever Democrat wins his party's nomination. 

You sick bastard...

Where do I sign up. 

You guys would prefer to see a sensible moderate with an independent streak and a conscience be replaced by a typical New England Democrat?

Yes. 

[TheresNoMoney]

You guys would prefer to see a sensible moderate with an independent streak and a conscience be replaced by a typical New England Democrat?

Obviously the goal should be returning the Democrats to the majority in the Senate, which means defeating every Republican possible.

And I happen to think that some New England Democrats such as Chris Dodd, Jack Reed and Patrick Leahy are among the best Senators in Washington.

[Frodo]

We should start some sort of a PAC to help Laffey defeat Chaffee -and then withdraw our financial support the minute Laffey wins the Republican nomination, giving it to whichever Democrat wins his party's nomination. 

You sick bastard...

Where do I sign up. 

I don't know if it's legal to start a PAC with this purpose, though. 

[TheresNoMoney]

I would rather be in the minority with another Chafees in the Repulican party than be in the majority with a bunch of "New England Democrats".

That means having people like Bill Frist and Rick Santorum continuing to control the legislative agenda for our country.

[nini2287]

I would rather be in the minority with another Chafees in the Repulican party than be in the majority with a bunch of "New England Democrats".

That means having people like Bill Frist and Rick Santorum continuing to control the legislative agenda for our country.

Not if we have a (hopefully larger) bloc of Common Sense Republicans to join the Democrats in stopping them.

[Vasall des Midas]

We should start some sort of a PAC to help Laffey defeat Chaffee -and then withdraw our financial support the minute Laffey wins the Republican nomination, giving it to whichever Democrat wins his party's nomination. 

You sick bastard...

Where do I sign up. 

I don't know if it's legal to start a PAC with this purpose, though. 

There are some technical problems ... any money already spent before the primary remains spent for Laffey.

[TheresNoMoney]

Not if we have a (hopefully larger) bloc of Common Sense Republicans to join the Democrats in stopping them.

In theory, that sounds okay but in reality the "Common Sense Republicans" will still vote with the Frist/Santorum the vast majority of the time.

And from what I've read of Sheldon Whitehouse, he seems like he would be a fine Senator.

[nick]

Chafee is an ok senator, but at this point its all about numbers.  He caucuses with the republicans therefore he needs to go.

[RomneyGekko Situation Hairgel]

We should start some sort of a PAC to help Laffey defeat Chaffee -and then withdraw our financial support the minute Laffey wins the Republican nomination, giving it to whichever Democrat wins his party's nomination. 

You sick bastard...

Where do I sign up. 

You guys would prefer to see a sensible moderate with an independent streak be replaced by a typical New England Democrat?

Call me a DINO or Republican Apologist, but I for one do not.  I would rather be in the minority with another Chafees in the Repulican party than be in the majority with a bunch of "New England Democrats".

I don't know why "New England Democrats" are so vilified.  As someone eluded to Dodd, Leahy, Reed, and yes Kerry are a few of my favorite Senators. 

[nini2287]

Not if we have a (hopefully larger) bloc of Common Sense Republicans to join the Democrats in stopping them.

In theory, that sounds okay but in reality the "Common Sense Republicans" will still vote with the Frist/Santorum the vast majority of the time.

And from what I've read of Sheldon Whitehouse, he seems like he would be a fine Senator.

Ben Nelson consistently has higher ACU rankings than Chafee.  Though if Laffey were to win the primary, I would enthusiastically back the Democratic candidate.

[The Duke]

Go Chafee.  And no, I'm not surprised by the partisanship of some of these Democrats here.

[Keystone Phil]

Here's hoping that Laffey is just as successful as Toomey was.

If he doesn't win but pulls a Toomey (scaring the incumbent almost to death) than I see this as a victory.

[12th Doctor]

Good Bye, Rhode Island Senate seat.

[Q]

I would rather be in the minority with another Chafees in the Repulican party than be in the majority with a bunch of "New England Democrats".

That means having people like Bill Frist and Rick Santorum continuing to control the legislative agenda for our country.

Unfortunately, this is what it comes down to these days.  Chafee is one of my favorites in and of himself, but his party label helps to enable some bad things much larger than himself to be enacted.

[Joe Republic]

Here's hoping that Laffey is just as successful as Toomey was.

If he doesn't win but pulls a Toomey (scaring the incumbent almost to death) than I see this as a victory.

Each to their own, I guess, but what does that really achieve?  Chafee is not likely to change his political outlook as a result of a damaging primary challenge.  It didn't really affect Specter in the end, unless you meant that it quite literally scared him almost to death.  But that wouldn't be fair.

It seems more like you just want them 'punished' for not toeing the party line.

[Keystone Phil]

Here's hoping that Laffey is just as successful as Toomey was.

If he doesn't win but pulls a Toomey (scaring the incumbent almost to death) than I see this as a victory.

Each to their own, I guess, but what does that really achieve?  Chafee is not likely to change his political outlook as a result of a damaging primary challenge.  It didn't really affect Specter in the end, unless you meant that it quite literally scared him almost to death.  But that wouldn't be fair.

It seems more like you just want them 'punished' for not toeing the party line.

I don't want someone who will just blindly vote the party line because I would never do that and it's obviously not the right thing to do. I want people that use my party to be punished. I want people who expect to be kissed up to for votes to be punished. Someone being a thorn in his side for a campaign is the least we can have if he's going to be a thorn in our's for six more years.

[Joe Republic]

What about the non-Republicans who think Chafee is actually a good senator for the state?  I'm talking about the ones who don't care about his own party loyalty, or what conservatives think of 'mavericks' in their party.

I'm surprised you'd put the wellbeing of your party over the interests of the people of Rhode Island.

[Yates]

I would rather be in the minority with another Chafees in the Repulican party than be in the majority with a bunch of "New England Democrats".

That means having people like Bill Frist and Rick Santorum continuing to control the legislative agenda for our country.

Unfortunately, this is what it comes down to these days.  Chafee is one of my favorites in and of himself, but his party label helps to enable some bad things much larger than himself to be enacted.

Well put.