|
SL County GOP Ready to Rise?
After the Pignanelli-Webb column ran in last Sunday’s Morning
News, I’ve heard from a number of Salt Lake County Republican
leaders who say the county party is poised for success and the dissidents
aren’t as big a problem anymore.
Jeremy Roberts, a young political operative who does fundraising
for the party, said his goal is to help the party raise $250,000
to help candidates in the county next year. That would be a healthy
war chest. He argues the party needs to focus a lot more on candidate
recruitment, particularly to find terrific candidates to go up against
Democratic legislators in swing districts.
Candidates and elected officials tend not to use the party organizational
infrastructure, Roberts said, and that’s a shame because the party
has legislative district leaders and voting district leaders ready
and willing to assist candidates at the grassroots neighborhood
levels. “There is a canyon between elected officials and the county
party,” Roberts said.
New party leadership will be elected at the county organizing convention
on April 30.
Homeland Security:
A Pound of Prevention
By Chuck Chappell, P.E.
(Mr. Chappell, who is executive director of the Wasatch Front Regional
Council, submitted the following to Utah Policy Daily as
a guest essay.)
Recent events point to the dangers of transporting hazardous materials
through developed areas. In both South Carolina and Utah, railroad
tanker cars recently leaked caustic material causing the evacuation
of thousands of residents from their homes. Tanker truck accidents
spill or emit gases and liquid chemicals along roadsides and near
neighborhoods. And, soon, nuclear wastes may be transported across
much of the country.
Most metropolitan areas developed around transportation systems
because of the access provided for passengers and freight. The growth
continues and it has enveloped airports, rail yards, ports and Interstate
highways. These historic alignments of rail and highway freight
lines now send hazardous freight into metro areas, which endangers
and congests unnecessarily. Since 9-11, terrorists threaten to use
our transportation routes to strike at the heart of our metropolitan
areas. Lest history repeat itself, we must convert the “National
System of Interstate and Defense Highways” and the rail lines that
“opened the west”, into Homeland Security Systems, by rerouting
the freight highways and railways.
The federal budgeters have deep pockets for Homeland Security as
the country scrambles to cut off another 9-11 attack, while other
essential programs, such as surface transportation, are held below
inflation. A few corridors have already been protected, i.e., the
Alameda Corridor between Long Beach and Los Angeles.
However, much more public funding is needed to encourage the innovative
financing needed for this critical and massive public works program.
In addition to removing a terrorist threat, a program to relocate
freight-ways around urban areas would reduce diesel pollution, lower
noise levels, relieve rail and highway congestion, and create badly
needed infrastructure. Most importantly, investments in infrastructure
produce a very high return to the national economy.
President Eisenhower parented the “National System of Interstate
and Defense Highways” and railroad barons of the 19th Century built
the railroads. Air service grew phenomenally in the 20th century.
The next step is to relocate the high volumes of freight transport
to less congested routes. Yes, it will be costly, but for this one
time, “a pound of prevention is worth an ounce of cure”.
National Politics
GOP Likely to Hang on to House Control
In his Tuesday e-mail column (sign up here),
National Journal’s Charlie Cook says there won’t be
many competitive U.S. House races next year. He doesn’t view Utah
Democratic Rep. Jim Matheson as very vulnerable. Here are
some excerpts:
A very early preview of 2006 House races shows slim pickings for
both sides. With just a handful of retirements -- and few competitive
open seats on the horizon -- both sides are scrambling to find serious
challengers to a dwindling field of vulnerable incumbents. With
the caveat that unpredictable events could always impact the 2006
landscape, Republicans do not appear to be in danger of losing their
majority.
At this point, Democrats actually have more seats in jeopardy than
Republicans have. Currently, there are four Democratic seats in
the toss-up category . . . Republicans, on the other hand, have
just one toss-up seat.
Republicans are likely to put long-time targets Reps. Darlene Hooley
(Ore.-05), Jim Matheson (Utah-02), Dennis Moore (Kan.-03) and Earl
Pomeroy (N.D.-At Large) in their sights, but there is little reason
to believe that these incumbents are in any danger of losing their
seats. All have survived rough and tumble campaigns in the past.
Fundamentally . . . Democrats need more than just a few good challengers
to be able to make up their 15-seat deficit. They need a real change
in the political atmosphere that would make currently safe incumbents
more vulnerable. Of course, many Democrats are counting on Social
Security to do just that, arguing that Republicans will mishandle
the issue and effectively put their incumbents, especially in senior-citizen
heavy states like Florida and Arizona in danger. The DCCC has even
put together a Web site (GOP Caught on Tape) that catalogues campaign
advertising and/or questionnaires of various Republican incumbents
that state their positions on privatization of Social Security.
Democrats are hoping to use these clips to beat GOP incumbents about
the head in the 2006 elections.
It's questionable just how much traction Democrats can make of
this issue. After all, Democrats have made attacking Republicans
as unworthy stewards of Social Security a staple of their campaigns
for years. And yet, Democrats do not have an overwhelming advantage
on this issue. The most recent polling has shown that Democrats
have anywhere from a six-point to a ten-point advantage over Republicans
on the question of who voters trust more to handle the issue. This
isn't to say that this issue may not become toxic for Republicans
in 2006, but voters may simply be more wary of swallowing the Democratic
line.
The ongoing trials and tribulations of Majority Leader Tom DeLay
have also encouraged Democrats with recent reports of the DCCC compiling
lists of candidates who received help either directly from DeLay
or from his PAC. Whether or not DeLay will become an issue in 2006
is debatable. Polling has shown that while the majority leader is
not an obscure political figure, he remains relatively un-defined
in the minds of the American voter and will be harder for Democrats
to demonize than the much better known former House Speaker Newt
Gingrich. More importantly, Congress is in much better standing
today than it was in the early 1990s when Republicans, led by Gingrich,
conducted the charge for reform. A March 3, 1992 Gallup poll showed
that just 18 percent of respondents approved of the way Congress
was handling its job. A recent March 7-10 Gallup survey showed the
number at 37 percent.
In looking at the current political playing field, it is hard to
see how Democrats can make up much ground in 2006. To pick up the
15 seats that Democrats need to take the majority, they would need
to hold onto every one of their 11 competitive seats and then win
15 of 17 (or 88 percent) of the vulnerable and potentially vulnerable
Republican-held seats. Arguably, Democrats needs two things to win:
a political environment that is tilted their way and a team of quality
non-incumbents on field.
|
Utah
Policy Daily is a service