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.
Second, your logic is flawed because you assume that their problems are our responsibility, they are not. They were free to apply to go somewhere else but instead they chose the illegal route to come here because they KNEW WE DIDN'T ENFORCE JACK!
They made their choice and their choice was to break and ignore our laws. Your arguement has nothing to do with bureuacratic malfeasance it has to do with the fact that they could not make a case for their reasoning to be allowed in so they broke the law.
They had a choice and that choice was to go somewhere else, someplace that wanted them or needed them. The U.S. is neither.
Did it ever dawn on you that maybe there was a legitimate reason they were rejected? Probably not since you're soooo convinced that OUR (not their) government failed them. They are not American citizens, our government has failed US by allowing these freeloaders to invade.
Deport them all.
So if all else fails use the race card huh? Seems your ilk likes to pass this word around a lot. Guess what, 9/11 made people realize that "Race Baiters" are not going to get free reign anymore.
"And having said that, it makes me pro-illegal?
Bingo, give that man a cigar. Anyone with any education at all, who reads 245(i), knows it's an amnesty for illegals, maybe not blanket, but an amnesty none the less. Just to refresh your memory, here is a link to what 245(i) says. 245(i)In a nutshell any illegal who was in the US during the specified time (last count was around 2 million or so), can have someone sponsor them, pay a 1,000.00 fee and become a US citizen.
And sponsors can include, an Employer, A Relative (Brother,Sister,Father,Mother). This means if they came to this country illegally, had a child in the US(who now becomes a US citizen), and this child now sponsors them(And don't even try to tell me this isn't happening or being discussed, try a search for 245i on google and look at the message boards, both Spanish and English), they then become non-illegals in the eyes of the law. Or let's suppose some Lawn service company sponsors an illegal(all they have to do is say that the Illegal is the only one who can do that job), again the illegal becomes non-illegal.
" But since you brought up the subject, please provide any sort of reputable poll indicating that the majority of the American people see immigration as the issue that will take front center stage in the 2004 elections."
You really should read my posts a little better, "Polls, and the people that rely on them are useless", polls can give many answers for the same question, it all depends on how you word it. So here is my wording, I and millions more like me, will make it a point that the average person understands just what illegal immigration is doing to this country. We have two years and lots of avenues available to us to do just that.
So what do you think the poor white family or poor black family will say to illegals taking the jobs they need to survive just because they will work cheaper? Or Middle Class Americans will say to the destruction of our "American" society? Or the fact that they must support(with their tax dollars), the millions of illegals who are even now overburdening our welfare system? You might think immigration will not be a factor in the next election, but just like the dims in this past election, you will be surprised.
Where's the government of Colombia's responsibility in this?
"And for that, I blame the idiots that didn't stop and think."
I'm still waiting for you to stop and think.
LOL!
You have any evidence to support that they focused on Gephardt's amnesty promise or is your speculation.
Now, I ask you for your cogent response to the fact that GWB hasn't done a thing about the the scandalous INS, nor worse yet, has he even proposed anything.
Oops, sorry, I forgot that he was occupied with colored warning signals and the old lady gropings at the airports.
Looks at the polls. The American people overwhelmingly are saying ENOUGH. Rewarding illegals has proven a disaster. Why in anyone's name would you want to do it again?
The family was placed on a waiting list because that's all they deserved. Their government failed them not ours.
As for consistency of standards I find it odd that you would even think I find the INS to be consistent when we are being over run by the dregs of society.
Right on target.
""Americans" and the "Rule of Law" should be first and foremost in our leaders minds, not the Hispanic vote."
And therein is where I think the crux of the problem lies.
ROTFLMAO!
Furthermore, President Bush and Ashcroft don't even address this problem. They don't even mention figures from the Border Patrol that shows the monthly totals of OTM's, and those from Terrorists countries who came into the country. They avoid the subejct. So I find it hard to believe they are doing their best when they refuse to let us know they even care. There's no discussion or words of caution to make us beware of the evildoers that stop off in Central America to become more "Mexicanized" and get fake id's to come on in to our Country.
Here in Arizona, our Governor only talks about getting trade in and out of the country in a more convenient manner. Tom Tancredo made a trip to our border to investigate border incursions and reported them on O'Reilly's show. I used to email Mr. Tancredo but somehow he now can only get email from his constituents. You cannot even email him on his Immigration Reform Caucus website. Something stinks about this. I don't think he became vocal and formed this caucus to become this inacessible. I think he's stepped on some toes in Washington or the RNC.
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.