A Second Hand Conjecture

Despite Keith’s wise admonition, many Republican leaning (or formerly R-leaning) voters have resigned themselves to the fact that Sen. John McCain will be the Republican nominee for Election 2008. That does not sit well with more than a few. Personally, since Fred! dropped out I’ve seen little reason to go on with life had little interest in how the remaining candidates shake out, except for praying that Huckabee does not get the nomination.

However, since there are really only four candidates left (or three if you accept McCain as a fait accompli), then it might make sense to start looking at potential VP candidates. Perhaps, with the right running-mate, one of the otherwise embarrassingly similar candidates will stand out from the rest. Of course, I can’t imagine that the candidates will give anyone a nod until they truly are the nominee, but that shouldn’t stop us from contemplating the possibilities. I’ll do the Republicans first, and then the Democrats in a separate post.

Instead of rattling off different pairings, I’m simply going to name some people who I think could convince me to vote for one of the potential Republican candidates. In no particular order:

(1) Gov. Matt Blunt, Missouri: Governor Blunt is well-heeled politically in that he is the son of House Minority Whip Roy Blunt, and he has previously received some campaign support from Karl Rove. He is also Lieutenant Commander in the Navy Reserve who went on active duty following 9/11, serving a six-month tour of duty in Great Britain during Operation Enduring Freedom, while also continuing his full-time job as Missouri’s Secretary of State. At age 37 (elected when he was 33) Blunt is also the second youngest governor ever elected, behind just Bobby Jindal of Louisiana.

Blunt’s most endearing quality, in my view, is that he received the Cato Institute’s top grade for all governors in 2006:

Republican Governor Matt Blunt of Missouri earns the highest score on the Cato Institute’s eighth biennial fiscal policy report card released today. Out of 46 governors reviewed, Blunt is the only governor this year to receive the grade of A for cutting his state’s budget, eliminating hundreds of government jobs and restraining Medicaid spending.

[Note that Huckabee received an F in that report]. To recap, Blunt is a fiscal conservative from a populous mid-west/border state, an active duty naval officer, and a governor with executive experience who received Cato Institute’s highest marks in 2006.

Whether he ran with McCain or Romney, I think Blunt would be a good pick. He’s not as well known as many others, but at least in the midwest he would have some name recognition, and that may be where the most contentious states are.

His negatives, other than low name recognition, include the fact that he’s not overly popular in his home state and because of his support for stem cell research he’s been branded an ex-Pro-life candidate by Missouri Right to Life.

(2) Gov. Mark Sanford, South Carolina: Another young governor, at age 47, Sanford has built a solid reputation as a fighter of pork, even going so far as to herd live pigs into the state House of Representatives to protest legislative giveaways. When he was a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, he actually turned down pork for his own district, and kept his promise to only serve three terms. He was also noted for often being the one of only two congressman to vote against bills that otherwise passed unanimously — the other was Ron Paul.

From Wikipedia’s description:

Sanford professes to be a firm supporter of limited government, and many pundits have described his views as being libertarian in nature. There are several Internet based groups trying to convince him to run for president in 2008. Most recently, he has embarked on an ambitious plan to reform methods of funding the state’s public education system. This would include measures such as school vouchers — aimed at introducing more competition into the school system as a means of fostering improvement. This would also allow more choice for parents who wish for their children to be educated in a religious or independent setting easier access at doing so. The plan, known as “Put Parents In Charge,” would provide around $2,500 per child to parents who chose to withdraw their children from the state’s public school system and instead send them to religious and other independent schools. Sanford has framed this plan as a necessary market based reform.

Also, although Sanford did not receive the highest grade from Cato in 2006 (when Matt Blunt garnered the only A), he did receive the next highest score:

Republicans Rick Perry of Texas and Mark Sanford of South Carolina are the next two highest scoring governors, receiving B’s for their solid commitments to keeping taxes and spending burdens low throughout their entire terms.

In short, Mark Sanford is another young Governor who brings executive experience and the potential to deliver southern voters to whomever’s ticket he graces. He also a staunch fiscal conservative with an independent streak and a demonstrated commitment to reining in pork spending, while also seeking market based reforms for problems routinely reserved for government, such as in education. He also received Cato’s second highest score in 2006 for his stewardship of South Carolina. Oh, and he voted with Ron Paul on a number of bills while he was in the House.

Sanford’s biggest negative is that he is almost entirely unknown amongst the general electorate. In addition, his independent streak and willingness to clash with his party over budgetary issues may make him unpopular amongst the Republican elite. Being paired with John McCain, and thus having two maverick’s on the same ticket, could spell disaster for the administration should they get elected. By the same token, he may be a good complement to Romney.

(3) Gov. Mitch Daniels, Indiana: Governor Daniels is the oldest of my picks, but still plenty young enough at 58. He is very well-connected politically, having served under President Bush (43) as Director of the OMB and as a member of the National Security Council and the Homeland Security Council. At the OMB, Daniels became known for doggedly pursuing cuts in social spending, and he “instituted a first-of-its-kind accountability system for all governmental entities.”

As governor, Daniels sought to rein in spending by the Indiana legislature and even pushed through a proposal to privatize the Indian Toll Road. His brightest accomplishment may be that he recently succeeded in getting meaningful tax reform approved:

In 2008, “Daniels proposed one percent cap of assessed home value would be instituted as the highest yearly property tax on homes. Property tax ceilings would be two percent for rental properties and three percent for businesses. The move would be permanent, making Indiana one of the lowest property tax states in the country,” according to Connersville News-Examiner reporter Seth T. Whitecotton. The plan was approved by the Indiana Congress with minor changes, locking in low rates for homeowners, businesses, and rental properties.

Gov. Daniels does have some daunting negatives, the foremost of which is the Democratic campaign fodder that he was in charge of the OMB when it saw a $236 Billion surplus turn into a $400 Billion deficit. Whether that can be laid it his (or anyone else’s) feet or not, the charge would become routine from the Democratic nominee. He also was not afraid to propose tax increases on the wealthy (albeit modest ones), as well as a $0.25 increase to Indiana’s cigarette taxes. Perhaps the most controversial thing about Daniels, however, is that he not only served as chief executive of the conservative Hudson Institute, but that he was also a Senior Vice President at pharmaceutical giant Eli Lilly and Co. His connections to Eli Lilly are most often cited when accusing Daniels of inserting the “Midnight Rider” into the Homeland Security Act, which rider protected the pharmaceutical company from law suits pertaining to thiomersal.

In sum, Governor Daniels has plenty of helpful political connections, brings executive experience to the table, has demonstrated a willingness to push through controversial tax legislation, and he oversaw a “first-of-its-kind” accountability program while Director of the OMB. His negatives may be tough to overcome, however, as he would likely be tagged from the outset as a neoconservative insider, with Big Pharma connections, hell bent on screwing the poor to help his rich buddies. Paired with John McCain, he may at least bring some credibility to the campaign’s promises of fiscal conservatism and government accountability, and Daniels could help deliver in those crucial mid-west states. As running mate to Romney, Daniels adds a bit of true conservative tinge to the Massachusetts governor’s rather bland credentials.

So there are my three picks. I tried to select people who: (a) had executive experience, (b) had fiscally conservative credentials, (c) had socially liberal or, at least, non-conservative marks, (d) were younger, (e) were either finishing or close to finishing their current terms this year, and (f) came from the south or midwest.

Feel free to snipe at my picks, or to leave your own in the comments.

Sphere: Related Content

Tags: Election 2008, John McCain, Mark Sanford, Matt Blunt, Mitch Daniels, Mitt Romney, Republican primary

Trackback URI | Comments RSS