by Daniel T. Zanoza, Executive Director
Just the other day I learned U.S. Representatives Peter Roskam (6th District) and John Shimkus (19th District) are assisting the political efforts of fellow Republican House member Mark Kirk (10th District). Kirk is seeking the GOP's nomination in the 2010 primary for the U.S. Senate seat that will be vacated by Roland Burris. Both Roskam and Shimkus have taken part in the placing of automated phone calls to their constituents on behalf of Kirk.
I have been following politics for nearly 20 years and, the more I see, the more disillusioned I become regarding the political process. Perhaps disillusioned is the wrong word. Maybe disappointment would be a better description of my feelings regarding this matter. The support of Kirk by two conservative Republicans makes me pose this question: Why?
Both Roskam and Shimkus have excellent voting records regarding social and fiscal issues. They strongly adhere to the state and national Republican Party platforms. The two legislators support the rights of the innocent unborn, the right to bear arms and seemingly believe in less taxation and smaller, less intrusive government.
In contrast, Kirk is a tax and spend liberal. His record on abortion is abysmal. Kirk is "Rated 100% by NARAL (National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League), indicating a pro-choice voting record." http://www.ontheissues.org/IL/Mark_Kirk_Abortion.htm.
And as far as gun control is concerned, well, the NRA-ILA's website (National Rifle Association of America, Institute for Legislative Action) http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Federal/Read.aspx?id=4879 refers to Kirk as a "Democrat" in more than one instance. To put it simply, many Second Amendment advocates call Kirk an anti-gun extremist.
To say Roskam and Shimkus are putting their political reputations on the line with their support of someone like Kirk through these automated phone calls would be a gross understatement. For example, John Shimkus represents a downstate district. Many in central and southern Illinois are employed by industries related to coal. Illinois is one of the leaders in the mining of coal and this source supplies much of the energy which serves the central and southern parts of the state.
Kirk's recent vote which assisted in the passage of Cap and Trade (American Clean Energy and Security Act) which, if passed by the U.S. Senate and signed into law by President Barack Obama, would result in the greatest tax increase in American history. It is estimated the legislation could increase energy costs for the average household anywhere from $1,500 to $3,000 annually. If passed, the bill would impact everyone. Many agree Cap and Trade would possibly lead to hyper-inflation and be a disaster for Illinois' economy. Cap and Trade will punish American consumers and transfer wealth at a rate never seen before.
And what about jobs? Today, the national unemployment rate reached 9.7%, the highest in 26 years and Shimkus' district has not escaped the economic downturn which faces our state and nation. Many more in Shimkus' district and other parts of the state may become unemployed, if Cap and Trade were to become law. Some estimate the loss of jobs in Illinois alone could total in the thousands. And thanks to Mark Kirk, and seven other Republicans, the above horror story may one day become a reality.
All of the above applies to Peter Roskam as well. Why would someone like Roskam, who, as I mentioned previously has an excellent pro-family voting record in Congress, go out on a political limb to back Kirk? Even though most of us would not do so, it's one thing to give passive support to a fellow Republican. But Roskam's robo-calls on behalf of Kirk serve to give the impression Kirk shares Roskam's values. However, according to Kirk's liberal voting record, this is not the case.
Subsequently, I am left to only one conclusion. The support of Kirk by both Roskam and Shimkus is nothing more than the "good ol' boy" network in action.
Many Illinois voters who work hard every day are not aware of Mark Kirk's ultra-liberal voting record in Congress. They simply don't have the time to follow politics as closely as they'd like. Therefore, receiving a phone call from someone they elected and, subsequently, trust may well influence their vote in the Republican primary. I believe this is a violation of the public trust. It's more than just politics. When the future of our country is at stake, I would hope politicians would act more like statesman than political gadflies.
It is clear the American public is tired of "politics as usual". We see these sentiments being voiced in Town Hall meetings and Tea Parties across the country. Sadly, two good men, who have represented their constituencies well in the past, are now violating the trust of those who put them in office. I would hope both Peter Roskam and John Shimkus would reconsider their support of Kirk.
I don't have a political horse in this race. But if there's one thing I know it is that Mark Kirk does not hold to the principles shared by a party that is supposed to stand for something better. Kirk truly is a Republican in name only.
Anyone wishing to receive RFFM.org e-mails should contact: [email protected]
NOTE: Comments to RFFM.org's blog which include ad hominems or personal attack will automatically be rejected. No hyperlinks allowed.
Comments