Let the Games Begin in the 14th

Interesting set of reactions to my post concerning Jim Oberweis a few days back. Some folks were furious, a few thought it was right on, and I had a nice chat with State Sen. Chris Lauzen about his own ambitions for the slot.

Lauzen intends to highlight his consistent record of 15 years as a reform Republican in the Illinois Statehouse. It is a good message. Lauzen has been a consistent voice for fiscal sanity in the legislature and has worked tirelessly and consistently on behalf of issues that are important to the Republican wing of the Republican Party. My affection for Oberweis was not intended to slight Lauzen. But there is a significant hurdle he has to overcome.

Politics is not a game of wishful thinking. I get weary when people talk about how things ought to be. Not that I would not like to see changes - I would; and quite a lot of them, at that. But in order to get into place to effect those changes, you have to play the hand you are dealt right now. The fact is federal finance rules put anyone who is not an incumbent, not anointed by a united party or not personally rich at a huge disadvantage. This is what campaign finance reform has wrought - ironic when the founders took great pains to see that this sort of situation did not develop, even conceding that there would be pockets of graft, which was preferable to setting up a system that would effectively block out large segments of the electorate. I have never supported the incumbent-protection schemes that go under the pretty name of campaign finance reform, but I and everyone who works in the field has to deal with the reality of them.
Some argued that Lauzen deserves the nomination and no one should challenge him. They may be right, but it is not the way our system works. I didn't like it when old establishment Republicans would tell us who we have to support in a primary and I'm not very sympathetic when conservatives adopt the same tactic, even if I am sympathetic to a particular candidate involved. I would like it to be a fair fight, which incumbent-protection schemes (campaign finance reform) often prevent. But I am convinced that the only way you earn a nomination is by winning it.

The hurdle Lauzen has to overcome is money. It is a lot harder to raise money in a federal race. If he can't raise in excess of a million dollars for the primary, it matters little how much he might deserve the nomination; he can't win it. And as ugly as that may seem, there is a practical base there, too. There isn't going to be money flowing freely out of Washington to whoever the nominee is in this district. Since the loss of the majority, the money spigots to non-incumbent Republicans has dried up substantially. What money there is will be directed to those states where Republicans have the best odds. Out of the 50 states, Illinois ranks about 67th on this list. So if a guy can't get the money for the primary he is not going to have the money for the general election. The odds then loom large for a Democratic takeover of the seat.

If Lauzen shows a sudden and vigorous fundraising prowess, then you have a real and interesting contest for this nomination. But if he gets in and shows up with just a couple hundred thousand for the September report, it's not going to happen for him.

I certainly think either Oberweis or Lauzen would make an excellent Congressman. Each can point to certain strengths. What I do not think is prudent is for any activists to become so inflamed with fury during the primary that they damage whoever the eventual nominee is.
In a larger sense, while the old Republican establishment is not yet dead in Illinois, it is mortally wounded. There is a vacuum here and there will be competition over who the people are who will rise to fill that vacuum. There is no avoiding that. What can be avoided, however, is the policy of mutually assured destruction that the bickering wings of the party have engaged in for the last decade or so. It is a policy both sides have succeeded in.

Let us disagree vigorously and pointedly. But let us do it with respect and civility, seeking victory through the weight of our respective arguments and the power of our respective ideas rather than the nastiness of our bombast or the contempt in our snarls.

Cross-posted at Illinois Review