The Virginia GOP: Saying what so many of us were thinking this morning…from Ohio to Maine to DC.
Dave Yost
I’ve followed with interest and a little concern the developments in the grassroots movement over the past few days, and I wanted to take a moment to share my perspective on the circumstances surrounding Dave Yost’s decision to run for Auditor of State rather than Attorney General.
I want to preface this with one statement that I believe many of us can make: I don’t have all the facts, and neither does anyone else, aside from the people directly involved. I think it’s important to be rather clear about that, because there have been a number of conclusions drawn, and I’m not sure that all of them are based in facts.
I first heard of Mary Taylor running as John Kasich’s running mate from one of the State Central committee people who represents me. I haven’t asked whether any of the information shared with me was on or off the record, so I will refrain from naming names. Besides, telling you it was State Central Committee rep narrows the field down significantly.
In general, there was dismay at the announcement, with a number of insiders concerned that the Republican party was losing its one state-wide elected official, especially with an announcement this late in the game. It opened up the very real possibility that the AOS spot would be lost to a democrat that already had a statewide campaign well under way.
A few days later, I heard on the radio that Dave Yost had announced his intention to switch races. This was surprising and disappointing. I speculated – did not know, just speculated – that Yost had chosen to switch because the “writing was on the wall” for the AG race and, rather than lose a quality conservative candidate, it would be wiser to run for the auditor’s seat.
I voiced this rationale to the State Central Committee person previously mentioned, who honestly couldn’t verify my assumption because they weren’t in the know. It was shared that Dave Yost called them seeking council, and it was a tough decision.
There have been a number of assertions made, that, if they were all true, truly would be a terrible signal that the Republican party still doesn’t get it. Among them are:
- Dave had been pressured into the move to make way for Mike DeWine, since he and Kevin DeWine were family.
- Mary Taylor was forced to run for Lieutenant Governor because she wasn’t getting any funds from the Ohio Republican Party.
- Mary Taylor and John Husted are political enemies within the ORP, thus the reason for not having funds to fund her campaign.
- Dave Yost is the hand-picked candidate of Kevin DeWine and John Husted.
Once I saw the anger on the message boards, I decided to see if I could find out the truth behind the changes. The truth in politics is an elusive thing, but I felt it was better to try, rather than accept the assertions made by others without researching them myself.
So, I e-mailed Dave Yost, and he e-mailed me back. I got his permission to share this with others, so I am doing so via my blog. Here’s what I got back:
Thanks for the opportunity to respond.
Mary Taylor surprised us all a couple of weeks ago when she announced that she would not run for re-election for Auditor of State, but would instead become John Kasich’s running mate.
That created a special challenge. The Auditor of State is one of three offices that controls how legislative district lines are drawn. Ceding that seat to the liberals is simply not an option. But with our popular incumbent switching offices, what was the GOP to do?
Ohio is a huge state – more than 11.6 million people spread out over 41,000 square miles. If you could meet 300 people a day, seven days a week, it would take more than a century to meet everyone. A statewide campaign is different than a city or congressional race, and simply cannot be ginned up in the matter of a few months.
I was approached by local and state leaders and asked to consider running for Auditor of State. I’ve been a county auditor, and understand and value the work. After much prayer, reflection and taking of counsel, I decided that I could best serve the conservative ideals I’ve fought for by defending the Auditor of State seat.
It was clear that no matter what my decision was, there would be people who would be angry with me. I chose what I thought to be the right thing to do, and did it. Every Ohioan is free to make up his or her own mind – that’s the right of every free American patriot. But the sole basis for my decision was what I thought was right.
A few points in response to the various rumors and arguments swirling around the internet:
Qualifications. I’m the only candidate who has actually done the work of an auditor, as an award-winning county auditor from 1999-2003. That’s why more than half of Ohio’s county auditors have endorsed me for this position.
It’s true that I’m a lawyer, not an accountant – I hire and supervise accountants. I’ve met a payroll, stood up to political opposition, fought for what is right – and prosecuted and convicted corrupt politicians who used your money illegally.
The DeWine Connection. Mary Taylor’s decision to run for lieutenant governor was hers alone. She was not “pressured” into it by anyone – and anyone who knows Mary would laugh at the idea that a party chairman or anyone else could force her to do anything she does not want to do.
I quite frankly do not care what Kevin DeWine thinks about me. He has been unhappy with me in the past, and will no doubt be unhappy with me in the future. This decision was about what is right for Ohio.
I understand the frustration with Mike DeWine’s voting record. The fact that Kevin DeWine is a second cousin to Mike DeWine is the most meaningless fact in this whole debate. How many of your second cousins do you know? How much of risk would you be willing to take to help one of them?
Switching races. My opponent was running for re-election to his House seat when Mary made her decision. He abandoned that election to seize an opportunity. His campaign is 10 days old as I write this. The sole difference between his decision to switch races and mine is that he self-promoted, and I was recruited.
Principles are things like constitutionally limited government, lower taxes and individual freedom. A job application is not a principle, no matter how you slice it.
My decision to run for Auditor of State was based on what was best for Ohio, not the hatred of another candidate. I’ve met many of the patriots in the 9-12 movement and the Tea Party, and feel certain that they will make their decision that way, too.
In response to this, I asked a follow-up question:
You indicate that you were recruited. The speculation as to who recruited you and why – aside from the reasons you imply above – runs along two lines:
- You were recruited by the DeWine consortium because it opened the door for Mike DeWine to win the AG race.
- You were recruited to switch races because internal polling indicated the writing was on the wall for your AG race – DeWine was going to win the primary anyway.
His reply:
The first call I received on this was from a county auditor in western Ohio the day after Mary made her announcement. Several more auditors called in the next few days, as did a number of county GOP chairmen.
Six days after Mary’s announcement, ORP Chairman Kevin DeWine called and asked me to consider running for AOS. I promised to consider it. During the next four days, I spoke with a couple of hundred people. Some were movement people who were opposed to the move. There were others in the movement who thought it was wise, for they understood the problems of another candidate starting a statewide race from ground zero and wanted to make sure we protected the apportionment board seat.
I also received calls from several prominent people in the business community, all urging me to do run for AOS.
I never spoke with Mike DeWine, or anyone associated with his campaign. But I don’t think the party was particularly worried about the AG primary — the apportionment board and taking control of the House are the priorities.
As to the polling… not true. The party did not run a poll in the AG race as far as I know. My internal poll showed me beating DeWine if I got my message out.
At the end of the day, conservative are better served winning the AOS seat than the AG seat. I will take the brickbats and do what I think is right. This time, every time.
Thanks for the opportunity to explain. If you disagree with my decision, you will at least be doing so on the merits.
Now, I don’t claim to know Dave Yost. My first encounter with him was when we happened to sit at the same table at last year’s Lincoln Day Dinner where, incidentally, he was running for Attorney General – all the way back then. He seemed like a good guy, but the dirty little secret is that almost all politicians seem nice. If they’re not good at being personable, well, then, they’re not going to get very far. So I’m not going to base my opinion of any politician on a chance encounter.
My next encounter was when he spoke at the MCFAN meeting last year. Again, nice guy, and I thought he made his case quite well. He was unambiguous, principled, and conservative. He also seemed very real, in his Hawaiian shirt. I walked away a big fan, especially when compared to the known quantity that is Mike DeWhine. I know that a number of other people in the audience did so as well.
That’s one of the reasons why it’s puzzling to me to see such a visceral reaction directed toward Dave Yost. Take a moment and think it through – how is it that someone who seemed so principled to people just a few months ago has drawn such ire, just from this decision. I mean, I can mostly understand it if all of the assumptions in the bullet points above are actually true.
But what if they’re not?
What if all the speculation is just that, speculation, and not based on facts?
Now, I know that many of you are a big fan of Seth Morgan, Dave’s opponent. In and of itself, there’s nothing wrong with that, and you obviously don’t need me to tell you that. Everything I’ve read indicates that he’s a conservative. But think about this for a moment: are you rooting for Seth Morgan because of Seth Morgan, or are you rooting for him because he’s not Dave Yost?
Put another way, are you rooting for him because of politics, or because of principles?
And, as a corollary to that, how much do you actually know about Seth Morgan? Sure, he’s a conservative, a state rep, and a CPA. But did you know that he ran for auditor of his county – and lost? Does the fact that Dave Yost has been backed by 44 of the 48 Republican county auditors in the state carry any weight with you? Surely not all can be Republican tools. Surely a couple, at least, can be conservatives.
I’m not asking you to not back Seth Morgan. I’m just asking you to consider that things may not always be as they seem.
Last Friday, members of a number of local grassroots organizations met with Jim Renacci at his office in Wadsworth. It was at his invite, and each of the four counties was represented by at least one organization, plus a bonus appearance by a Summit group. My bride and I were there representing Medina Patriot’s Forum.
A couple of passing observations before I dig into the meeting. First, it was an astute move by Renacci. It afforded him to have a cozy gathering, on his own turf, and have a forthright conversation without the usual guardedness that goes along with camcorders and microphones whirring in the background.
Second, it is a sign of the times – and of our growing visibility – that a candidate would have groups like ours to reach out to in the first place. With the exception of a couple perhaps, 15 months ago – prior to to the election – none of these groups existed. Times have changed, and though we can’t and shouldn’t take the credit alone for the recent Republican wins in New Jersey & Massachusetts, only the willingly blind deny that the new grassroots were part of those victories.
Now, on to the meeting.
Process
The first half of the meeting was really a conversation between he and I (I was the aggressive, angry looking bald guy for those that were there :)), and most of my questions had to do with the process that he went through that led to his backing by the National Republican Congressional Committee, Kevin DeWine, Timken, and the three county party chairs. He took the time to step through the process and timeline that led to his decision to run – who he reached out to and why.
Renacci is a realist. Very few run for office to come in second (though I’m sure Bob Barr would have viewed that as progress), so he had to learn, first, how the process worked. And the process works with money. Specifically, at least $2.5 million to win, and perhaps as much as $3.5M (two years ago, Boccieri spent $4M).
No candidate is going to raise that from local resources alone, so he went to where the money was at: the NRCC. Now, they didn’t just hand over their support; I’m sure there was more work to it than I can convey here or that Renacci conveyed on Friday, but at the very least they conducted a background check on him and ran him through a series of questions to assess his viability. When I inquired as to the nature of the questions they asked, they focused more on “why do you think you’re the best candidate” and “why do you think you can win” kinds of questions. If there were questions of principles and issues, he didn’t mention them.
When the NRCC was ready to throw him their support, he went an extra step and asked them conduct a more thorough background check (to that point they already had 240 pages on him), to which they complied. The upshot was that there were no showstoppers. Sure, every businessman is going to get sued if they achieve some level of success, and Renacci is no exception. But we’re not talking about a love child squirreled away in a dark corner of the globe or a failed Ponzi scheme.
The NRCC was neither the beginning nor the end of the process he undertook. He talked to Kevin DeWine, presumably because of his position in the Ohio Republican Party, and made clear that he felt that if the party continued on this way they’d never win another election. He talked to most major elected Republican officials in all four counties, either directly or indirectly. He had the NRCC conduct a poll of his name recognition among other things. He talked to the Timken Empire to gauge their support. And he participated in the selection process that I wrote about previously and will write about again soon.
The result of all of this work is that he gained the support of the NRCC, the Timken Empire, and three of the four county chairs. For us grassroots folks, those are all what we consider “bad signs.” We don’t like the NRCC, we’ve heard that Timken chose Schuring, and we don’t like the selection process that the county chairmen used. NRCC represents RINOs, Timken represents influence peddling, and the selection process represents the wrong way to do it. Collectively, it smacks of a concerted effort by all three groups to circumvent the primary, and we really don’t like that.
But you know what? If I had been in Renacci’s position – if I were looking to win an election, I would have done it the exact same way even though I hate RINOs, influence peddlers, and all the rest. But it’s the process. The process requires money. It is what it is.
I suppose at this point that some grassroots people reading this are shaking their heads in strenuous disagreement. I get that, but let me ask you some questions: First, is the problem with Renacci, or with the process? Can you blame a person for learning to work with the system? I think we can all agree that the process as we understand it isn’t just flawed, it’s flat out broken. But frankly, that’s not something we’re going to get fixed this election cycle. Like everything else wrong with the republic, fixing it is going to take patience and perseverance.
Second, if this is what it takes to raise the money to win the race, did the other candidates have the savvy to go through the same process? If not, why not?
As far as process is concerned, I have no problem with Jim Renacci. I am impressed by his level of effort and thoroughness and did not conclude, based on Friday night and previous conversations, that he told half-truths or flat out lies about his relationships with the powers that be.
Principles
Most of the evening focused on the process, as you may have gathered. Principles were discussed, but mostly in a way that you had to derive them. Granted, some principles I already knew, such as his stance on abortion (conception through natural death) and the 2nd Amendment. He mentioned again that he signed the petition stating he’d work to repeal health care reform if it passed. Finally, he indicated that he most identifies with Mike Pence, and that ought to count for something.
But that leaves plenty of room for questions about immigration reform, card check, and other issues. Unfortunately, we didn’t touch on those issues as much as I’d've liked.
Now, I said before that Renacci is a realist. The same attribute that benefited Renacci in process is what worries me in principles. That is, it’s one thing to have principles, it’s another thing entirely to stick to them when in the midst of a legislative battle. The point that I made to Renacci a couple days later is that for too long we’ve seen Republicans sacrifice too much to progressives that are not as strong as they appear. How can we be certain that he, the pragmatist that he is, won’t do the same? It may be a question to which the only answer we can believe is “watch and see what I do,” but he made an effort to answer it nonetheless. The nutshell is, Jim Renacci doesn’t need the job, therefore he doesn’t feel compelled to do other’s bidding for the sake of securing their future support.
It’s a valid answer, but seeing is believing.
In Conclusion
In general, I think Renacci had a strong showing, and he tried to drive home the theme that the over-arching goal isn’t to win a primary, but to beat Boccieri. Point taken, and it was certainly a better showing than his appearance at the Akron/Summit breakfast meeting last Saturday. He was transparent, forthright in his answers, and personable. He made the effort, which is consistent with how he’s managed the process thus far.
I started this primary season supporting Matt Miller. As a result of Friday’s meeting, I am now undecided, and that surprises me. Both candidates have strengths and weaknesses. I need to know more about how Matt Miller intends to get the money to win, and I need to know more about Jim Renacci’s principles and how intends not to lose his soul in DC.
Not all are worth watching. This one is. Hope for the new year.
Now we must make sure that the promise is delivered upon. Remember three stats as we enter 2010:
- Congress approval rating two weeks prior to the 2008 election, according to Real Clear Politics: 14%.
- House of Representatives re-election rate two weeks later: 94%
- Average House of Representatives re-election rate of last 5 cycles: 96%
They don’t care because they don’t think it matters. Prove them wrong.
Colorado’s minimum wage is dropping three cents, to $7.25 per hour. It is tied to inflation, and would actually drop more if not for the unconstitutional federally-mandated minimum wage of the same amount.
I have no problem with this. Since it is tied to the actual cost of goods, the net effect should be, more or less, zero. But don’t let that stop a reporter from zeroing in on the pain and suffering it will surely inflict on those unfortunate enough to still be making minimum wage. A quote from the article:
“Yeah, it’s 3 cents an hour. But that 3 cents an hour adds up at the end of 12 months,”
Does it? Let’s see. Three cents an hour in a forty hour work week adds up, before tax, to $1.20, or about the cost of a Coke at Wendy’s. Over a year, it adds up to $62.40. That’s about the cost of a newly-released Xbox 360 game.
So, what does it add up to? Not a lot.
My point: it takes about 20 seconds to open up Windows calculator and do the math required to put this in proper perspective. That’s 2o seconds that the AP, apparently, couldn’t spare.
Feel free to cast me as someone who hates the poor. If you can make that illogical leap, well, then quite frankly I don’t care what you think of me.
