Is Orrin Hatch a Career Politician?

When someone says it as well or better than you can, step aside and give the lady full credit:

Analysis: Should we have career politicians?

Written by Kate Dalley on April 10, 2012 in Columnists, Opinion - No comments

More Sharing Services

Kate Dalley is a news commentator and co-host of the Perspectives morning show on Fox News 1450 AM 93.1 FM. The opinions stated in this article are hers and not those of St. George News.

OPINION –   The candidates are at it again. As politicians race to secure their place in our history books, we may roll our eyes and sigh at the slick advertising, campaign techniques and endless speeches. Every few years, we see the slew of posters and endure the character assassination commercials as we endure the election process.

Becoming a county and state delegate this year has given me a different perspective on the political arena. I have been fascinated listening to the passionate speeches of new candidates who seek to make changes and of incumbents, who scramble to keep their positions.

Presently, there is a 94 percent re-election rate in the U.S. House and an 83 percent re-election rate in the U.S. Senate. Because of name recognition, and usually the advantage of money, it can be easy to stay in office. I have to wonder though, is this really how politics is supposed to work?

Our founding fathers had some very distinct ideas about who should govern America. They described the office of a politician as one of short-term service with little pay, so that politics would not be sought after as a means of wealth and power. Indeed, in all cases of public service, the lower the profit the greater the honor.

Benjamin Franklin made it clear that a person elected into office should be a common man who stepped up to serve his fellow man and then, shortly thereafter, stepped down to let the next man perform his service. The idea of “career politician” was a foreign and nonexistent idea back in the 1700′s and considered an oxymoron. Franklin also believed public servants should not be paid a salary so that the office would attract those “… wise and the moderate … the men fittest for the trust ….”

When writing about a proposed Constitution for the State of Virginia, Jefferson suggested a single long term for senators. This would have several salutary effects: it would prevent senators from conducting their office so as to promote their own careers, and it would keep their perspective focused on the people whom they were to represent. Public office was to be a public service, not a means for self-enrichment. Jefferson once said, “(a) government by representatives elected by the people at short periods was our object.”

Permanent power can be a dangerous thing.

President George Washington declined his $25,000 yearly salary and took himself out of office after two terms in office –  voluntarily. He did this on principle because he wanted to serve his fellow man without compensation and do so in total servitude.

The duty to serve never meant the longevity to serve. Politics was never meant to be a profession.

We have a senator in the state of Utah, Orrin Hatch, who has become an “institution” in Utah because of his record 36 years in office, more years spent in office than any other politician in the history of our state.

Many still believe that this senator’s power would supersede what any new, younger politician could do in office. Hatch ran against incumbent Senator Frank Moss back in 1976 as a young politician, himself. Throughout his campaign, Hatch asked this question repeatedly, referring to Moss: “What do you call a senator who has been there 18 years? You call him home.”

Now, just about 40 years later, he has been in office longer than 60 percent of the citizens of this state have been alive – and almost my entire life.

Hatch should be more concerned with the issue of maintaining our liberties than he is with his legacy.

In my opinion, Hatch’s recent speech at the Washington County Republican Nominating Convention, held at Dixie State College April 7, was more about his power in Washington than a passion for fighting for our constitutional freedom which is in jeopardy right now. He claimed he needed one last term, “this time for sure,” he said, to get things done in Washington D.C. Well, he has had 36 years to make it happen.

I tend to think how much more we could have accomplished over the last 36 years by electing newbies with the same zeal and passion that the senator himself embraced when he first began his career. Sen. Mike Lee, who is a junior senator to Hatch elected two years ago, has done a great job in office. Hatch began his career as a junior senator when he began his political ride. I am not convinced that clout is the only answer.

Now, Hatch’s campaign runs on the premise that we need his seniority and power as he will likely soon be named the Senate Finance Chairman. Yet, he fails to tell us in his campaign speeches that the chances of the Republicans taking over the Senate are slim and the position may not even  be available to him. He said the same thing in 2006 while campaigning and we bought into it. The appointment to Senate Finance Committee never did happen.

Sen. Mike Crapo from Idaho would be named to the position if Hatch is not re-elected and the Republicans take the Senate. This conservative from Idaho would be an excellent choice for the position.

“Is there anything more dangerous to the cause of liberty than a politician fixated on re-election?” asked radio talk show host, Neal Boortz. He has a point.

As one moves up the political ladder – for example, from representative to governor to president –  one’s job duties change from one position to the next. I can understand wanting to assume different roles and different positions of responsibility thus giving a politician a substantial amount of time in a political career. I do have a difficult time, though, with someone who spends 36 years in the SAME position. Politicians are a product of their environment and we’ve created a system that creates the path of least resistance for politicians towards becoming corrupt rather than not.

Almost four decades is a very long time spent in the “swamp” we call Washington. The longer they stay in office, politicians can be bought and sold through cozy friends called lobbyists. A local candidate recently told me that we need to keep Hatch to compete with the other politicians that bear as much seniority as he; in other words, we must keep Hatch to play the game in Washington. That is exactly what is wrong in Washington, that we let anyone stay long enough to play the game in the first place.

The entire system needs to change and ousting career politicians is our first step forward towards reforming the system. Why are term limits inclusive to just the office of president of the United States?

Like all great TV show series, politicians should know when to quit. The time comes when they may bow out gracefully, leaving with dignity as they choose to step down, rather than waiting to be ousted by their own party.

Most would argue that Hatch did a great job for Utah, and I think that he served his position well; but all good things must come to an end.

When politicians start to think they are the only answer to our problems, they are most likely not the answer at all.

Orrin Hatch Dominates Caucus Night

Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT)

I know a losing position when I see one. And last night I had one.

As anyone who reads this page will know, I love and have defended the Utah caucus/nominating process. After last night I am even more resolved to keep it alive and prospering.

What happened last night in Utah is indicative of the very best the representative republic our founders envisioned. That vision involved putting power in the hands of the people, ordinary citizens of this great country, who were handed the keys to the powerful engine of freedom and liberty. The founders believed the majority of Americans could be trusted with such power because their intent was to divide and separate the throttles of government into three branches, executive, judicial and legislative. Central to their idea was that the people would be vigilant because they were free citizens, and resist any encroachment by the federal government into their lives.

Their design of the government was that it become a representative republic, meaning the people would elect representatives directly by simple majority (democracy) to then represent them in a divided federal government (representative republic). The intent was to limit power, to discourage centralization of power and to keep power in the three branches in check so no one in America could consolidate power and impose tyrannical rule.

Last night we witnessed the process play out under the same rules as existed in 2010, but with a much different result. Even though Bennett and Hatch cast identical votes in favor of TARP, it was obvious the memory had faded in the case of Hatch. The anger level was decidedly down last night. People genuinely feared three things: Obama's consolidation of power, the effect of Freedom Works threatening to take over Utah politics (Hatch painted himself as a victim very effectively), and fear that Utah would lose its clout in Washington without such a strong savior figure as Orrin Hatch. I really believed that people in my caucus thought life without Orrin Hatch was inconceivable.

The democratic process where majority rules happens at the cellular level in the caucus. A simple majority of 51% determines who the elected representatives will be to go forward to the nominating convention where candidates are chosen. That's what is meant by a representative republic. Those representatives, elected at the grassroots level by their peers, then make bigger decisions for the majority who sent them forward to do the people's business in the divided representation available to them in the executive and legislative branches.

Organizing support at the grassroots is what the caucus is all about, and Hatch had a formidable organization that turned out their supporters in record numbers. People who say it was the Church's appeal just don't understand that the Church says all the same things in a repeat of all the same press releases and over-the-pulpit statements in every single election cycle that I can remember. Nothing really changes.

I was instantly aware of the shift in demographics last night. Very few young or even middle-aged folks were there at our caucus. The average age was in the sixties and above. Someone who attended Orrin Hatch's home precinct caucus quipped that he was the youngest one there.

Hatch skillfully deployed a Terry Woods interview with Jake Garn, Norm Bangerter and Jim Hansen, who all talked about Orrin's clout, influence, seniority, knowledge, experience - you name it he has it - and posited the "what if" list of horribles associated with not returning Orrin to the Senate. Then they trotted out negative ads against Liljenquist that drowned him in a sea of doubt about his viability. You don't win six terms in the Senate without knowing how to win an election. My advocacy of Dan's credentials as an acceptable alternative to Hatch landed on deaf ears.

So basically my position last night was DOA. One lady after I laid out my position and offered my slate of candidates I was supporting: Mitt Romney (President), Dan Liljenquist (Senate), Gary Herbert (Governor) and John Swallow (AG) challenged me with, "Well, I can't vote for you, because Mitt Romney endorsed Hatch and that means you don't support Mitt Romney." Wow, I didn't have a response for that convoluted reasoning. Romney's endorsement last go around for Bennett was a non-starter. This time, however, the "I need Orrin Hatch" appeal was compelling.

You win or lose in the court of public perception and opinion. But the majority made their will known in our caucus, and it was overwhelmingly supportive of Senator Orrin Hatch.

The only story remaining is whether or not Hatch will garner enough support at the nominating convention on April 21st (60%) to avoid a primary race. If I were a betting man like Mitt Romney, I'd betcha $10,000 he will.

Never underestimate a canny old six-term Senator with a big war chest who can muster the octogenarians to his side and instill the fear of God in those who believe he is a national treasure who cannot be replaced and is indispensable to the nation in the fight against all things Obama.

In the case of Orrin Hatch, he cannot be replaced until he dies. Let's all pray for his health and longevity now.

The Utah Caucus Night - March 15th, 2012

Utah is now within days of caucus night, to be held on March 13th for Democrats and March 15th for Republicans. Since I know nothing about what the Democrats are doing (and don't care), I will focus on what I know best - the Republicans.

Utah has a unique caucus system, not well-known by other people around the country, and perhaps not understood even here in Utah. I am currently a state delegate from my little country precinct, and intend to stand for re-election again next Thursday night (fair warning to any potential opponents who don't agree with me). Let me give some perspective and add to the many voices who are encouraging a record turnout at the caucuses.

Who Your Delegate Is Determines Who the Candidates Will Be

In Utah, the candidates who represent each political party are chosen by delegates at state and county party conventions. The process begins at the neighborhood or precinct level, like it will again next Thursday night. Typically a precinct includes 1,200-1,300 homes, so a precinct is roughly the size of a neighborhood. There are about 3,500 Republican precincts in Utah's 29 counties.

In each two-year election cycle, each precinct holds a meeting called a "caucus," usually early in the year of the November election. This year the date is March 15th at 7:00 p.m. During the precinct caucus meeting, people from your precinct (neighborhood) will be elected to represent your precinct as delegates to the state and county nominating conventions. As a state delegate in 2010, I was elected with a stated position of supporting Mike Lee and voting against Bob Bennett. I told my neighbors I believed they were entitled to know who their delegate would be voting for. Those who agreed were free to vote for me, and those who disagreed could pick my opponent. I won a simple majority vote to be elected. It was a sacred trust, and gave me an instant appreciation for all candidates who submit to the process of putting their names on a ballot, regardless of political persuasion.

Why Delegates Matter Now More than Ever

At the nominating convention the delegates attend, if a candidate receives 60% of the delegate vote, they automatically become the party’s candidate and move on to the general election in November. If no candidate reaches 60%, the top two candidates move on to a primary election held in June.

In 2010, the incumbent three-term senator, Bob Bennett, was ousted at the convention by the delegates and two new candidates, Mike Lee and Tim Bridgewater, emerged in the senate primary race for the Republican nomination, since neither was able to garner 60% of the vote in convention. The reason those delegates you elect next week matter now more than ever before is simple - it's time to take back the other Senate seat from Orrin Hatch. He has represented Utah with distinction, and we can all be grateful for his dedicated service. But after six six-year terms totally 36 years in the Senate (almost half his lifetime!), it is time to send someone else to represent us.

Hatch is making an argument that experience, clout, seniority, influence, and knowledge make a difference, that somehow we can't live without his expected rise to the chairmanship of the Senate Finance Committee. The simple truth is that is all hypothetical political-speak for the real reason: "You must send me back so I can set a consecutive Senate service longevity record." He absolutely believes in his heart of hearts he is a Utah treasure of inestimable worth and that he is irreplaceable and an unassailable icon of mythical proportions. Well, maybe. I don't think so.

Simple Steps to Becoming a Delegate

Becoming a delegate doesn’t require you to be a politician, have extensive knowledge of political science or social issues, or be a public speaker. You are going to a meeting with your neighbors, letting them know you are committed to getting involved and striving to make a difference for your area.

Basic things to remember:

1. Determine your voting precinct - check it out to find the location of your meeting at utgop.org

2. Identify people in your precinct who will vote for you (reach out to as many family, friends, and neighbors as you can), but even then all you have to do is show up, speak up, and advocate for what you believe.

No prior experience is required, you will enjoy the process and you will make a tremendous difference.

I made a determination early in January of 2010 that Mike Lee was the right U.S. Senate candidate for Utah and for the nation. He is now in Washington and is making an instant impact and producing real results during an important time for the United States. Only today, he and Jim DeMint (R-SC) and Rand Paul (R-KY) put forward a projected balanced federal budget to be achieved in five years. They are doing EXACTLY what they promised to do when we sent them there. I like to think I got that one right, and I am so grateful for the invitation extended to me by my friends to get involved.

Now I am extending that same invitation to each of you as you witness the escalation in the fight for freedom globally. You cannot change the world all alone overnight, but you can distance yourselves from the apathetic and inertia-bound tendencies seeming to grip us on matters political and religious. Now is the time to step up and to be counted in the precious free exercise of your beliefs.

The Utah Caucus System is Superb

Utah’s system of electing delegates to county and state conventions system is under constant attack. The arguments were heard again and continue unabated. Those who lose elections, particularly the bitter Bob Bennett who characterized his loss in 2010 as being "excommunicated from the GOP," contend it is "government by the few, the rich, the extreme or the political elite." Others say it is "closed, controlled and unfair" as it allows only a few to cast ballots for candidates who eventually appear on the November ballot. Still others will tell you the caucus meetings happen too early in the cycle when the average person is not thinking politics. Since Bennett's loss there are advocates for an "alternate path" to the November ballot - they want a 2,000 signature petition as a way around the expressed will of nominating convention delegates. Watch and see what happens if Hatch goes down to defeat. The outcry will be deafening. But do not be deceived. It is only a truly representative republic at work doing its best work.

On the other side of the argument where I reside, many constitutional experts would agree Utah's process is the best and most constitutionally-correct system in America. In case you hadn't noticed recently, Utah is receiving a lot of "pub" because of Lee's outspoken alignment with a traditional and "strict constructionist" point of view of the Constitution. In so many ways, Utah is emerging with a powerful voice on the national scene.

Dan Liljenquist, Republican Candidate
 for U.S. Senate

I love the Utah caucus system because it is so inherently and fundamentally grassroots by nature. It's how a guy like Mike Lee can mount a campaign and spend 1/10th of what the entrenched incumbent does and win! Dan Liljenquist is trying to mount a repeat performance this year against Hatch. The process is totally controlled by the citizens who care enough to attend their neighborhood caucus meeting and get elected to make change they believe in at the subsequent nominating convention. Those who choose to stay home, of course, have that right, but they can never say thereafter they were somehow "cheated" out of their representative republic.

Elected delegates to the county and state conventions then have the responsibility of nominating the candidates who will appear on the November ballots for their respective parties.

The Utah Caucus Epitomizes the Representative Republic

Thomas Jefferson

In my view, our system in Utah comes closest to the fulfillment of representative republic envisioned by the founders than any other I've seen. We elected representatives to vote on our behalf, rather than a direct democracy where a simple majority rules. The whole idea is captured by Thomas Jefferson in The Jeffersonian Cyclopedia, No. 1685, p. 193, where he wrote, “The Constitution was meant to be republican, and we believe it to be republican according to every candid interpretation.”

Clarification:  That's not Republican with a capital "R" -- it's "republican" as in "representative republic" with a small "r." Never forget the difference.

The average Utah/U.S. citizen typically does not take the time to study issues and candidates as thoroughly as one who puts himself/herself up for consideration as a delegate to the nominating conventions. It is presumed delegates will make informed choices based upon their best judgments and that trust is imposed by their friends and neighbors at the caucus meetings at the lowest level of government imaginable. Some feel disenfranchised because they have to work on caucus night, or they are on vacation, or they forget to attend. Whatever the reasons, they may still voice their opinions among their friends and neighbors and encourage and persuade others face-to-face to their point of view in whatever honorable way they desire, even if it's just a simple conversation in the grocery store check-out line.

Everyone Should be Suspicious of Incumbents

It is not my belief the founders would have approved of the current system comprised of incumbent career politicians. Bob Bennett promised he would never become one, then continued to run again and again. Orrin Hatch  (currently in his sixth six-year term) is in the same category, having served twice as long as Bennett. Neither has demonstrated the wisdom to step aside voluntarily. There's always someone who wants term limits enacted into law across all fifty states simultaneously so no state that voluntarily imposes term limits will be penalized. We must reject that argument out of hand. The founders gave every citizen the power to impose term limits on any elected politician - it's called a ballot in your hand every two years. That's why only citizens at the ballot box in America are empowered by the Constitution to impose term limits on their elected officials. A passive and indifferent electorate, however, leads to the tyranny the founders feared most. You may think your senator is the finest senator on planet Earth today, but the intent of the founders was never to send people to represent their neighbors who would then get automatic annual pay raises, perks and multi-million dollar pensions and gold-plated health insurance plans at no cost to them personally. Amazingly, only in recent weeks a bill was introduced to punish members of Congress who engaged in insider trading based on privileged information they garnered from closed-door hearings! And that's why Martha Stewart spent a year in jail - but that would never happen to a member of the privileged political class!

The caucus system makes it much easier and less expensive for citizen candidates from the grassroots to unseat an incumbent. The only vocal opposition I've heard against it comes from those who favor the incumbents. I proved to my own satisfaction that my one voice in 2010 DID make a difference. I can't even count the number of people who told me they voted for Mike Lee because of my advocacy of his candidacy.

The Caucus Eradicates the Possibility of Tyranny

In states that have a direct primary election, the choices of who will run in the final elections are made on a "pure democracy” idea. That was exactly what the founders were trying to avoid because of its tendency to eventually empower tyrants after the revolution.

The founders gave the citizens of the United States of America a government designed to protect against the intrusion on their God-given rights by all powers, foreign and domestic. However, the implied trust is a presumption that in a free representative republic the citizens would remain vigilent and actively engaged. The inherent weakness in our form of the representative republic is that we may lose those protections if we don't.

I'm writing about it today looking back on what happened in 2010 as a testament to what can happen when we are awake, alert and on task as a free people. I have every confidence the trend will continue into the election of 2012. I once heard a well-known lobbyist describe the U.S. Senators as "100 potentates." It's time to do more now than to "hope" for a "change" from the past for the sake of our future well-being as a country. That "hopey-changey" thing didn't quite work out the way we thought it would did it? After 36 years of being part of the past and all that has put us where we are today, now is the time to act.

As I have stated passionately before, we really have no other choice as the guardians of freedom's flame.

Top Five Reasons It's Time To Retire Orrin Hatch

Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT)

Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) has served six terms in the U.S. Senate. He unseated Frank Moss so long ago as a young upstart conservative hot shot that few voters are old enough to remember his reasoning. Hatch said at the time that Moss had served too long, and that there should be no such thing as a career politician.

That was thirty-six years ago. And now Senator Hatch is asking Utahns for an unprecedented seventh six-year term, making him 84 years old at the end of it!

His reasons for re-election are not unlike the ones Frank Moss once used: Experience, knowledge, influence, clout, seniority. In fact, the primary reason one keeps hearing from the Hatch camp has now been undermined by the announcement this week that liberal Senator Olympia Snowe (R-ME) is retiring. Hatch has been saying if we don't re-elect him, Snowe would take the chairmanship of the Senate Finance Committee instead of him. I weary of the hypotheticals, but if we don't send Hatch back to the Senate, the next Republican in line would be Mike Crapo (R-ID), not a bad alternative to Hatch, since Crapo is very conservative. Of course, that all assumes the Republicans will take control of the Senate this year, a task now made arguably more difficult with Snowe's announcement.

So herewith, my top five reasons Senator Orrin Hatch should be retired by the nominating convention, since he refuses to walk away with dignity on his own:

1. He's old. Senator Hatch will be 78 years old on election day. No politician in the history of the state of Utah has EVER been elected at that age in a statewide election. Age itself shouldn't be an automatic disqualifier, but when you've served for thirty-six years as a senator, it's definitely the number one reason for retirement. My Dad's 90 years old, and even he thinks Orrin's too old. It takes one to know one, I guess.

2. Senator Hatch has served long and well. Over the course of his storied political career (after saying there should be no such thing when he ran the first time), there are surely some votes in his record that one could find fault with. I am personally acquainted with Senator Hatch, and he helped me with an issue a few years ago. I remain very grateful to him. Some say he's not a true conservative. Some say he's just too liberal because of his cozy relationship with former Massachusetts Senator Ted Kennedy. Some say his politics are more closely aligned with Washington D.C. values than Utah values. Well, whichever view you take of his record you are welcome to it. I have voted for him six times. I have no problem with his politics. He just needs to accept the fact he can retire gracefully, wish his competitors well, and step aside to make way for the younger generation. No shame. Be content. Be a statesman. Be happy with all you have achieved. But he won't because of reason number 3.

3. Orrin Hatch in his heart of hearts actually believes he is indispensable and irreplaceable. One could even argue that he paved the way for two Mormon presidential candidates this year by being the first Mormon in the modern era to run for the presidency of the United States (Joseph Smith was running the year he was assassinated in 1844). But we must not forget George Romney before Hatch also was a bold political pioneer for Mormons, to say nothing of Harry Reid, the Senate Majority Leader (but he's another story). There are 33 seats up for election in the Senate this November. Ten of those seats are being abandoned by Senators who have announced their retirement. Hatch is convinced that his Heavenly Father would be disappointed in him if he were to step aside now and not continue to use his talents, seniority and political skills to be part of the ongoing equation politically in this country. He really wants the longevity record for Senate service. However, he can be replaced, he will be replaced, and life in America's Capitol and the state of Utah will go on without him. There's a reason no one in Utah's congressional delegation or Utah's governor has endorsed him. They all feel in their heart of hearts what's coming for Orrin.

4. I'm already looking past the 3500 statewide caucuses on March 15th at 7:00 p.m. By the way, if you aren't sure where your precinct will be meeting, check out utgop.org. Pre-register on the site, look up your precinct by typing in your address, then plan to attend. At the caucus your neighbors will be nominated and elected to political offices, including precinct chairmen, county nominating delegates and state nominating convention delegates. They will state their position on which candidates they favor, and you will have a chance to voice your opinion with your vote. I will be going to put myself forward as a state delegate again. I will announce my intention to support another candidate this year, rather than Hatch. I'm keeping an open mind this year, but leaning right now toward Dan Liljenquist. If my neighbors agree with me in caucus and elect me as a state delegate, then I expect to attend the state nominating convention next, and there I will join with other like-minded delegates who will most likely do to Senator Hatch what they did to Senator Bennett two years ago. And when that happens, please do not buy into the media spin that it will be whacked out right-wing conservative extremists (Tea Partiers, if you must) who are tossing out Senator Hatch. Rather, it will be thoughtful, careful and seasoned observers like me who just think that 36 years is enough. It's just enough. That's all.

5. It's time to impose term limits. There's an idea that must be enthroned in our thinking as Americans if we are ever to turn our politics around in this country. It is simple. It's called term limits, and they are granted to citizens who can go to the polling places in the general elections and work their will at the ballot box. They can change government peacefully and under the banner of the Constitution of the United States every two years nationally. There is no such thing as a perpetual entitlement to an elected office in this country. Senator Hatch has had a long run, even a good run most would say, and now it must come to an end. His attitude is reminiscent of the arrogance we observed in Senator Bennett (he was 77 years old in 2010). "They've taken away my career," he said through his tears when ousted by the delegates. There is and never has been, indeed never should be any such thing as "a political career." The political class has nearly destroyed America. In each case they could have stepped aside with a proud legacy of accomplishment and service. However, each has sadly chosen to go out with a stinging rebuke by voters instead. It is reminiscent of what happens in the playoffs in professional sports. In the end there are always many losers and only one winner. By retiring and stepping aside gracefully, each could have gone out a winner in everyone's mind and been a true statesman. One can only hope Senator Hatch will accept the judgment of his peers with more grace and humility than did Senator Bennett, who recently characterized his dismissal as being "excommunicated by the GOP."

I really almost hope I'm wrong. I've stated before that I'm not much of a prognosticator when it comes to predicting political outcomes. You can dismiss my five reasons out of hand and not offend me. But this time I have a feeling.

I'm feeling that for the first time in his life Orrin Hatch will be defeated.

Dan Liljenquist Announces Candidacy Against Senator Orrin Hatch

Dan Liljenquist, Republican challenger to Orrin Hatch

This past week brought a long-anticipated announcement that former Republican Senator in the Utah Senate, Dan Liljenquist, would run for the U.S. Senate in Utah, challenging the aged one, six-term Senator Orrin Hatch, who will be 78 years old on election day 2012.

Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT)

For 36 years, almost half his life, Hatch has represented Utah. I am personally grateful for his service (more on that later), but enough is enough.

It's just the kind of David vs. Goliath political match-up needed to tantalize the voters and should assure a large turnout for the Utah caucuses coming up on March 15, 2012. Liljenquist, 37, similarly youthful as Senator Mike Lee, has won the hearts and minds of tea party groups who are disenchanted with Hatch. The reason they are excited about Dan's candidacy is they notched a victory in knocking off Bob Bennett two years ago, and now hope an encore performance may be in the wings for retiring Hatch. I have said before I do not believe all the hype that the tea party was solely responsible for Bennett's defeat, because I believe other moderates like me had a hand in it, but a victory is a victory no matter who takes credit for it.

Liljenquist stated, when he announced he was resigning his local senate seat to challenge Hatch, he would focus his campaign on reducing the nation's debt. He said Washington is broken and that some GOP lawmakers share in the blame. Hatch, of course, would counter he wants to do the same. His record says otherwise, however, despite his efforts to sponsor a balanced budget amendment on several occasions in the past. Hatch's long voting record includes support for TARP, which he later admitted he regretted when he sensed he had angered conservatives.

Dan Liljenquist is a name most Utahns have never heard before, but he has received national recognition for his work to overhaul Medicaid and the state's pension system for public employees, two critical and demanding issues begging for solutions. "Even counting for inflation, 36 years is enough," Liljenquist said Wednesday in announcing his candidacy for U.S. Senate. "Service in Congress was never meant to be a lifetime appointment. In the the military there's an adage that says, 'Be brief, be brilliant and be gone.'"

Hatch will say he is "not Bob Bennett." He's been quietly offering cash to potential state delegates to work for his campaign, up to $2500 per month. It's perfectly legal, just unsavory because it smacks of buying delegate votes. A good question to ask those who support Hatch at the caucuses would be, "How much is his campaign paying you to run as a delegate to the state convention?" He's done an unprecedented outreach to conservative groups like the tea party activists to assure them of his conservative credentials. Knowing how to organize is the main strength of his long-time friend and campaign manager, former state Republican party chairman, Dave Hansen. But all of it will not be enough this time around.

I have no argument with Hatch's conservative creds. My problem is his age. It's simply time for him to turn the page and retire. If he can't seem to make that decision on his own, it is my wish to get re-elected as a state delegate from my precinct and help him find the exit door.

Hatch's campaign war chest is even larger than Bennett's. He has more than $4 million in the bank based upon his latest filings. Other potential challengers, Republican Representative Jason Chaffetz and Democratic Representative Jim Matheson, both avoided a head-to-head battle with Hatch and decided to keep their powder dry in Congress, rather than to challenge him.

Liljenquist will have to embrace the help of conservative groups with strong ties to the tea party. FreedomWorks hinted last month it will support the Liljenquist bid, when it named him the organization's "legislative entrepreneur of the year."

In my estimation Hatch is making the same calculated error in judgment that Bennett did last year. Historically, I have not had issues with either of their conservative stripes. They are both "conservative enough" for my taste. I voted three times in the past for Bennett, then backed Mike Lee. This cycle I've voted six times in the past for Hatch, and this time I will back Dan Liljenquist, with the possible proviso that I will reserve an "endorsement" if someone else I like better enters the race.

Chris Herrod

Utah State Representative Chris Herrod announced yesterday he would run also, but he's not going to get as much traction as Liljenquist in my opinion. The danger at convention is they might split the vote in preventing Hatch from getting 60% of the vote out of convention and avoiding a primary. On the other hand, they could combine against Hatch, eliminate him as happened last time with Bennett and set up a primary between the two of them. The politics of our two former Utah senators are not the problem with me as much as their audacity to think they are irreplaceable. In Hatch's case, his certainty approaches infinity.

I have personal affection for Senator Hatch, because he advocated for me and my colleagues through a legislative fight on Capitol Hill he believed in and helped us win. I'll spare you all the details, but in an act of defiance against a piece of ill-conceived legislation requiring a 100% excise tax on charity-owned life insurance, he took on Senator Charles Grassley (R-IA), then chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, and personally walked a "colloquy" I had written in support of our position onto the Senate floor at 1:30 a.m. in the morning and had it entered into the Congressional record. But for his heroics on our behalf, a bad proposal by Grassley's chief of staff would undoubtedly have been passed into law.

So my problem, once again, is not about Hatch personally or politically. It is simply his age and longevity. In my presence on one of many trips to Washington, I heard him say he was going after Strom Thurmond's record for longevity in the U.S. Senate, a dubious reason to stand for re-election in my heart and mind (and that was the last time he ran, not this cycle). Actually, Byrd and Inouye served longer than Thurmond, but at the time he was the longest-tenured. By re-electing Hatch for a seventh term, Utahns would place Hatch high up in the rankings of longest serving senators, making him 84 years old at the end of his next term. For me that's just a bridge too far.

Like the aging prize fighter who thinks he can get keep getting back into the ring for one more big pay day, Bennett and now Hatch seem to lack the grace and good judgment to read the tea leaves (pun intentional), stand aside and make way for the younger generation. They both believed in their hearts they were indispensable to the citizens of Utah, the nation and the world. You can add the universe too if you like.

Between now and the March 15th caucus night in Utah you will hear that Hatch's experience and his pending (assuming Republican control of the Senate can be achieved) chairmanship in the Senate Finance Committee will be needed to get America back on track and that no one else is as well-equipped to get the job done as Orrin Hatch. The same argument was made for Bennett, who had only served half as long (three terms and eighteen years) as Hatch. The irony is that Hatch unseated Frank Moss to win his seat originally, saying no one should become a career politician. Setting the agenda in even a powerful committee is not as "powerful" as one might suppose. Each senator, after all is said and done, has only one vote to cast on every single measure that comes before him/her. And the argument that this is no time for "rookies" flies in the face of not understanding the upheaval that will almost certainly carry over from the 2010 uprising across America. In my judgment this is the perfect time for rookies, as many of the old guard in both houses of Congress voluntarily made a decision to bow out, take their campaign war chests with them and return home before they lost. But not Hatch. Damn the torpedoes, he would say, and full steam ahead to victory!

In this presidential election year nationwide the ballots cast for POTUS will not be as important as the ones cast for the 33 Senate seats in play. If the majority of those seats can be won by conservative Republicans who can gain control of the Senate and remove the old guard this time around, a Senate majority of new faces sent BY THE PEOPLE to stop the Marxist Obama dictatorship agenda once and for all will go a long way to restoring Constitutional principles.

We made a mistake in 2008 as a country. We elected a smooth talker with a personality. We hoped for change. He promised "hope and change." He passed the largest socialist program in the history of entitlements, Obamacare, and he borrowed more money than ALL the former U.S. Presidents COMBINED! Our national debt now stands north of $15,200,000,000,000 and rising fast. The interest on the debt now stands at $1,500,000,000 per day (yes, billion)! Then-Senator Barack Obama once accused George W. Bush of being "irresponsible" for raising the debt ceiling, calling that request a "failure of leadership," and now has demanded and passed record stimulus spending bills that have done little to stimulate the economy. He continues to cry for more debt and more spending when we're bleeding at every fiscal pore. And that's "responsible" leadership?

He sent Navy Seal Team 6 to Pakistan and killed Osama bin Laden. This last week he proposed slashing the Defense Department spending to the bone, and ended the war in Iraq to bring home the troops. He takes credit for it, but the proposed withdrawal timetable was already set by the Bush administration before he took office, and the intel on the whereabouts of bin Laden was gleaned through enhanced interrogation techniques advocated by the Bush administration. Boldest of all, he now is "working around" Congress while it's out of session (or is it really "in" session - only Obama can tell us apparently) to appoint even more "czars" to head up regulatory commissions as far as the eye can see, emboldening his followers for a government-run economy that purports to be the solution to every societal ill we face. He is trashing the Constitution daily.

But I digress, this post is about our future and my sincere wish is that the future does not include another four-year term for Barack Obama. Elections are about the future, we must remember, not about the past. Obama is positioning himself to "win the future," but his idea about what that looks like is very different than mine and yours. I was told the other day that an in-law "hated" me because of my conservative positions, so I should not speak for everyone I know. As I have said before, I am not as much concerned about who wins the presidency as I am about putting an end to Congressional gridlock. Without a victory in the Senate that gives a majority to conservatives, not the old guard RINOs who have gone along to get along for too long in this country, we are doomed to continue down this path of fiscal insanity.

I'm not certain at all that we can reverse course in America at this late date, but I am certain we must try by retiring the old guard and beginning afresh. That begins with electing new conservative senators who are more responsive to the people like Dan Liljenquist. My hope is he will join Mike Lee and others in taking control of the U.S. Senate and partnering with the House in passing a balanced budget amendment, repealing Obamacare and never again flirting with the European socialist agenda for an entitlement society.

In my considered judgment Dan Liljenquist is better equipped to do that than Orrin Hatch.