Posted on 11/18/2002 6:23:24 PM PST by Mark Felton
November 18, 2002
Target: Tom Tancredo
Some Say GOPPrimary Challenge Likely
By Josh Kurtz He represents one of the most conservative districts in the nation. He just trounced his Democratic challenger by 37 points. Yet Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.) may be one of the most vulnerable incumbents in the 2004 election cycle.
Tancredo, a controversial, outspoken voice for the Republican right who is entering his third term, has angered leading Republicans back home and in the White House.
The House Member's criticisms of President Bush's immigration policy bought him a 40-minute rebuke earlier this year from Bush adviser Karl Rove, who, in the Congressman's own words, warned him "never to darken the door of the White House again." And his decision to renounce his pledge to serve only three terms has infuriated powerful Colorado Republicans, including his political patron, former Sen. Bill Armstrong (R).
"I'll be surprised if he doesn't have a primary [in 2004]," said Floyd Ciruli, an independent Colorado pollster.
Several Republicans, including popular state Treasurer Mike Coffman, who just won a landslide re-election of his own, are considering taking on Tancredo in the '04 primary.
Other potential candidates include state Sen. Jim Dyer (R) and former Arapahoe County Commissioner Steve Ward. "It's a given" that someone will run against the 56-year-old lawmaker, Coffman said. "There are questions about his term-limit pledge. When you have someone like Senator Armstrong, who was his mentor, backing away from him - I think that resonates."
Armstrong was instrumental in getting Tancredo elected in the first place, endorsing him over four strong opponents in a competitive GOP primary to replace retiring Rep. Dan Schaefer (R) in 1998. By Tancredo's reckoning, Armstrong's blessing was worth 3 points at the polls - which just happened to be his margin of victory in the primary.
Even though he may not seek re-election in 2004 - and would consider running for Senate if Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell (R) retires - he has chucked the term-limit promise nevertheless.
"The term-limit pledge in and of itself is not the deciding factor if he will run again," said Tancredo spokeswoman Lara Kennedy.
Like all Members who change their minds on term limits, Tancredo has cast his decision as being in the best interests of his district and pet causes. Tancredo wants to preserve his seniority for his suburban district south of Denver and angle for better committee assignments. Plus, he does not want to lose the momentum he has built fighting the government's open immigration policies, Kennedy said. Tancredo is the founder of the House Immigration Reform Caucus.
While plenty of politicians have broken their term-limit pledges before, including Rep. Scott McInnis (R-Colo.), Tancredo's decision is more noteworthy because he once headed Colorado's term-limit organization.
"All too often you have terrific candidates who come to Washington with the best of intentions, but they get too comfortable, and when the time comes, they don't want to go home," lamented Stacie Rumenap, a spokeswoman for U.S.Term Limits.
Whether Tancredo suffers any political damage remains to be seen. So far, the handful of Members who have broken their pledges, including McInnis, have not suffered any consequences at the polls, Rumenap conceded. And U.S.Term Limits is not in the business of recruiting challengers to incumbents who have broken the pledge.
Tancredo has promised to return campaign contributions to donors who are dismayed at his decision to ignore the term-limits pledge. But Armstrong - who did not respond to several messages left at his Denver law office - called the refund offer "hollow," according to The Rocky Mountain News.
Armstrong, meanwhile, has offered some kind words about Coffman.
"Mike Coffman is someone the Republican Party and the people of Colorado will rally around,"he told the News. "There is no doubt in my mind that he will be on the short list for whatever comes along - it could be governor, it could be Senator, it could be Congress."
Coffman, in fact, began running for Congress last year - in the new 7th district, which adjoins Tancredo's. But when the final district lines were drawn, Coffman found himself in Tancredo's 6th district, just a few blocks from the 7th, and chose not to move or run.
Coffman said that while he has not given much thought to the 2004 election yet, he believes that Tancredo will be vulnerable. The three Republicans most frequently mentioned as challengers are all military veterans, while Tancredo is not, and that could make a difference in a district that values military service, political insiders said.
Coffman, a 47-year-old Marine Corps vet who served in Operation Desert Storm, said Tancredo's military deferments during the Vietnam War would hurt him as America prepares to attack Iraq, and could be linked to his decision to ignore the term-limit pledge.
"Here's a guy ordering young men off to war and he himself didn't serve," he said. "I think in this conservative district, something like that could resonate."
Certainly, Tancredo's record would contrast with Coffman's, or Dyer's, who is an Air Force veteran, or Ward's, who is a lieutenant colonel in the Marine Corps Reserves and is on active duty in Florida.
Dyer called it "highly unlikely" that he would challenge Tancredo, but said somebody else might, and predicted that the term-limit issue would sting the incumbent.
"I think a number of people that support Tom are not going to support him if he breaks the term-limit pledge,"said Dyer, who was a surrogate for Tancredo at a candidate forum this fall. "We can't say that situational ethics is bad for party A but not for party B."
Ward, a former mayor of suburban Glendale, could not be reached for comment, but is expected to return to Colorado next year. In an interview with the News after completing his one term on the Arapahoe County Commission, Ward made his opinion of politicians who stay in office too long perfectly clear.
"Any politician who can't find the bathrooms in the first week doesn't deserve to be in public office," he said.
It is unclear whether the White House would try to get involved in a primary challenge to Tancredo.
But it is fair to say that Tancredo is not one of the president's favorite people. Earlier this year, the Congressman accused Bush of pandering to Hispanic voters and trying to prop up Mexican President Vicente Fox by offering amnesty to certain undocumented immigrants. That declaration brought an angry 40-minute phone call from Rove, and Bush pointedly failed to introduce Tancredo to the crowd during a political rally in Colorado in September.
With his hard-line views on immigration, Tancredo is no stranger to controversy. In 1999, he gained publicity for reaffirming his support for gun owners' rights just days after the massacre at Columbine High School, which is six blocks from his house.
The Southern Poverty Law Center released a report last summer linking Tancredo to extremist groups, which the Congressman dismissed as "McCarthyism."
And he was embarrassed earlier this year when it was revealed that undocumented workers had been hired to do some construction work on his Littleton home.
But pollster Ciruli said Tancredo's views on immigration are in line with his constituents'.
"Nobody who's going to argue the soft side of immigration is going to beat him in the Republican primary, or even in the general," he said.
After seeing two fairly viable opponents get wiped out by Tancredo in 1998 and 2000, Democrats appear to have abandoned the 6th district - leaving Republicans there to decide whether they want him to remain in office.
The same people who are paying all the bills for the illegal deadbeats using hospitals. That alone is a reason to close the borders.
I may be wrong but I think Aztlan is derived from "Aztec Land", ii is a recent word.
Sen. Robert C. Byrd, West Virginia Democrat, yesterday said he will delay passage of border-security legislation because it now contains a provision of amnesty for hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants
"It is lunacy — sheer lunacy — that the president would request, and the House would pass, such an amnesty at this time. That point seems obvious to the American people, if not to the administration," Mr. Byrd said on the Senate floor.
Deb, all this teaching you is making me tired. Good night and take care.
So the GOP can win with 40% of the white vote?
Show me where I have said one word in favor of illegal immigration.
The problem with you all, is your need to lie in order to make your argument...I guess that's why you like Tom so much.
He lies too.
Till them, why not enlighten us all with your brilliant solutions for the borders and homeland security.
If you were paying attention to what you read, you'd have noticed I recommended you read the Patriot Act not the Homeland Security Bill (it's not even in final form). If you have read neither and you have no idea what you are arguing...how can you know which side is right?
You need to get off these threads that contain subjects you know nothing about. Just joining the Buchanan chorus of disgruntled losers...is not a smart position.
While I usually do give thanks to people who served honorably in the military - as I recall President Bush was in the National Guard. Now I know a lot of NG personel went to war - but we need to be honest about this -GW Bush was never going to Vietnam.
[As for Tancredo himelf, he is a tough campaigner, and he is taking-on the illegal immigration issue when no one else will; he would probably defeat Coffman, or anyone else, that takes him on -- regardless of what Rove or Bush do]
Tancredo is saying what the majority of the American people want said - that is why he is a danger to the President. The administration has its agenda - not exactly sure what it is - but it is not America first and they don't want some little congressman from Colorado speaking out and getting the 'peons' all worked up.
And your point is?
You bet he does!! And he is willing to sacrifice this country to get what he wants. I am not sure when you realize what he is doing you will like it, however.
Is the Matricula Consular a legal document? The value of the consular identity document for legal purposes is limited to Mexican usage, i.e., by Mexican authorities either here or in Mexico. The document’s acceptance by U.S. authorities is another matter. By choosing to recognize the Mexican document, which is not recognized by the federal government, local governments are raising significant legal issues by exercising a form of their own foreign policy, which is reserved to the federal government under the Constitution. The local governments would also be unlawfully discriminating if they recognized identity documents issued by the Mexican government, but did not do so for similar documents issued by other governments.
There has been no court test of the legality of local governments recognizing the Matricula Consular, but there is good reason to believe that the policy might not stand up to a legal challenge.
It's Aztlan, some myth dreamed up by squatters in the U.S. Many are members of MEChA, a despicable seditionist organization.
What do you have against Tancredo?
How is an obscure congressman a danger to a sitting president?
The majority of the American people being the two people who actually brought up immigration as an issue in the Gallup poll?
150 years ago: 1.) Immigration was controlled. 2.) Immigration was predominately from Europe. 3.) Our country had a sparse population with an interior that was basically EMPTY 4.) We were not being invaded by a another country to the tune of 1mm per year for more than 25 years straight.
And I wouldn't take much comfort in the fact that in recent times we have been generally prosperous. America, given the post war baby boom, had a surplus population going into our government’s changed immigration policies circa 1965 that favored 3rd world immigration. It takes a relatively long time to change that momentum. Yet, I suspect the bloom is off the rose today and now excess 3rd world immigration is finally beginning to show its deleterious effect in our politics, rule of law and economy. And the trends are not favorable.
I find your comparison of today's immigration free for all with yesteryears immigration pact with Europe like comparing apples with bananas. Yes, I don't think the invasion of tens of millions of Mexico’s most depraved citizens will do anything but drag our country down. I'd think that Mexico's secular low standard living and corruption would be proof enough on that. Though, as bad as this situation is, it's only a little better than continuing to allow Muslims into this country legally by the thousands every month. You know what...either way we are screwed if nothing is done about massively scaling back immigration and controlling our borders.
So it is not a law violation yet. Now all you have to do is get Tom to file a challenge to it since he can claim standing to do so. Why not push him to back his rhetoric up with action?
I don't know if he ever had one. Want me to check on it, el jefe? (Translation: who cares?)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.