What is John Huppenthal hiding from McCain and the rest of us?
It seems that Arizona State Senator John Huppenthal (R-20) has some positions he really doesn't want us to know about. And he's refused a request by Senator John McCain (R-AZ) and others to come clean about them.
According to Project Vote Smart, a nonpartisan voter education organization:
The New York Times' blog, The Caucus has offers an explanation. They note that refusing to answer such questionnaires appears to be part of an effort by candidates...
John Huppenthal spends a lot of time talking about past legislation, trying to sift through bills he's voted on to try to bolster whatever case he's making at the time. But when it comes to explaining exactly where he stands on the issues most important to Arizonans, he flatly refuses to do it where everyone can see it.
From following his career and his campaign, I can tell you that Huppenthal is no moderate. On nearly any issue I can see, he takes the more extreme view. Perhaps it's because Huppenthal knows that if he actually, clearly tells everyone where he stands on some of these issues, we'll all see just how out of the mainstream he really is. So he hides.
"Oh well," you may say..."all politicians do it. Hiding their views is what they do."
First of all, we deserve better. We deserve to be told explicitly where candidates stand if they expect us to vote for them. Candidates should not be able to simply take our vote for granted just because they have a little "R" or "D" beside their name.
Secondly, not all politicians hide their positions. Not Senator McCain, who thinks Project VoteSmart is so important, he serves on its Board. And not Donna Gratehouse, who has readily participated and completely outlined her positions on the VoteSmart questionnaire. John McCain and Donna Gratehouse share those character traits: the courage of their convictions and talking straight.
No candidate is going to perfectly align with a voter's views. If you think they do, it's probably because you haven't dug deeply enough. Trying to get a perfect alignment is eventually pointless. But some candidates purposefully cultivate vagueness and doubletalk so they can't get pinned down. That way, we can THINK we agree with them, even when the candidate has positions far outside of the mainstream.
By refusing to answer this questionnaire, Huppenthal is intentionally hiding his views so that constituents will think they agree with him. And he spends so much time talking about his legislative record, instead, because that lets him cherry-pick bills he's voted on without ever having to get into the details of where he actually stands on issues.
So, for example, Huppenthal can claim he's a supporter of education and point to a budget he voted for which included All-Day Kindergarten. But it's misleading. What that doesn't say is that he vociferously fought against All-Day-K and still thinks it's a bad idea. That's just one example of how Huppenthal has failed to support Arizona education. Other examples include where he actively worked to strip funds and decision-making from public schools. But when asked about these things, he'll cherry pick a couple of bills he's voted on in the past that makes it sound like he's God's gift to education.
In contrast, when you're talking straight with the voters and you have nothing to hide, like Donna Gratehouse, it's easy to be honest, open and transparent about who you are and where you stand. You may not align perfectly with where such a candidate stands on every issue, but Donna is respecting us enough to be explicit and clear about it. And, in fact, once we see her positions clearly, we can see how such a candidate really does agree with the mainstream on many of the issues important to common-sense moderates. Huppenthal doesn't show us that courtesy.
We need a State Senator who is open, honest and transparent with the voters. One that actually represents mainstream Arizona's values. Please vote for Donna Gratehouse for AZ State Senate.
And as for John Huppenthal, it's time to come clean, sir, and talk straight with the voters. We deserve better from you. So I join Senator McCain and several news organizations in urging you to fill out the Project VoteSmart questionnaire so we can actually see where you stand on these important issues.
According to Project Vote Smart, a nonpartisan voter education organization:
SENATOR JOHN HUPPENTHAL REPEATEDLY REFUSED TO PROVIDE ANY RESPONSES TO CITIZENS ON ISSUES THROUGH THE 2006 NATIONAL POLITICAL AWARENESS TEST WHEN ASKED TO DO SO BY KEY NATIONAL LEADERS OF BOTH MAJOR PARTIES, INCLUDING:Why would Senator Huppenthal REFUSE REPEATEDLY to answer this important voter education questionnaire? Why doesn't Huppenthal want Arizona voters to know where he stands on these issues?
John McCain, Republican Senator
Geraldine Ferraro, Former Democratic Congresswoman
Michael Dukakis, Former Democratic Governor
Bill Frenzel, Former Republican Congressman
Richard Kimball, Project Vote Smart President
Over 100 news organizations throughout the nation also urged their candidates to supply their issue positions through the National Political Awareness Test.
Urge Senator John Huppenthal to pass the National Political Awareness Test.
The New York Times' blog, The Caucus has offers an explanation. They note that refusing to answer such questionnaires appears to be part of an effort by candidates...
...to hide their issues positions, and incumbents’ suggestions to refer to their voting records are “evasive” because it can be difficult to sort out positions through a web of different votes on seemingly similar bills, Ms. Kimball said. “If you’re looking for an incumbent’s response, good luck.”
After simply asking candidates if they are willing to share their views, Project Vote Smart makes them prove it. To have their “yes” answer count, candidates must respond to at least 70 percent of the categories on a questionnaire involving issues that are both of concern to the public, determined by polling, and likely to come up in during their term.
Those responses are logged, verbatim and in their entirety, on Project Vote Smart’s website as part of its Voter’s Self-Defense System, a database of information on over 30,000 candidates and elected officials.
The site gets close to 16 million hits a day around election time, Ms. Kimball said, calling it an “indication that people actually need help.”
Project Vote Smart works hard to maintain objectivity. For example, board members must bring on a member of the opposite party to join, so Senator John McCain brought on Michael Dukakis, the Democratic nominee for president in 1988.
John Huppenthal spends a lot of time talking about past legislation, trying to sift through bills he's voted on to try to bolster whatever case he's making at the time. But when it comes to explaining exactly where he stands on the issues most important to Arizonans, he flatly refuses to do it where everyone can see it.
From following his career and his campaign, I can tell you that Huppenthal is no moderate. On nearly any issue I can see, he takes the more extreme view. Perhaps it's because Huppenthal knows that if he actually, clearly tells everyone where he stands on some of these issues, we'll all see just how out of the mainstream he really is. So he hides.
"Oh well," you may say..."all politicians do it. Hiding their views is what they do."
First of all, we deserve better. We deserve to be told explicitly where candidates stand if they expect us to vote for them. Candidates should not be able to simply take our vote for granted just because they have a little "R" or "D" beside their name.
Secondly, not all politicians hide their positions. Not Senator McCain, who thinks Project VoteSmart is so important, he serves on its Board. And not Donna Gratehouse, who has readily participated and completely outlined her positions on the VoteSmart questionnaire. John McCain and Donna Gratehouse share those character traits: the courage of their convictions and talking straight.
No candidate is going to perfectly align with a voter's views. If you think they do, it's probably because you haven't dug deeply enough. Trying to get a perfect alignment is eventually pointless. But some candidates purposefully cultivate vagueness and doubletalk so they can't get pinned down. That way, we can THINK we agree with them, even when the candidate has positions far outside of the mainstream.
By refusing to answer this questionnaire, Huppenthal is intentionally hiding his views so that constituents will think they agree with him. And he spends so much time talking about his legislative record, instead, because that lets him cherry-pick bills he's voted on without ever having to get into the details of where he actually stands on issues.
So, for example, Huppenthal can claim he's a supporter of education and point to a budget he voted for which included All-Day Kindergarten. But it's misleading. What that doesn't say is that he vociferously fought against All-Day-K and still thinks it's a bad idea. That's just one example of how Huppenthal has failed to support Arizona education. Other examples include where he actively worked to strip funds and decision-making from public schools. But when asked about these things, he'll cherry pick a couple of bills he's voted on in the past that makes it sound like he's God's gift to education.
In contrast, when you're talking straight with the voters and you have nothing to hide, like Donna Gratehouse, it's easy to be honest, open and transparent about who you are and where you stand. You may not align perfectly with where such a candidate stands on every issue, but Donna is respecting us enough to be explicit and clear about it. And, in fact, once we see her positions clearly, we can see how such a candidate really does agree with the mainstream on many of the issues important to common-sense moderates. Huppenthal doesn't show us that courtesy.
We need a State Senator who is open, honest and transparent with the voters. One that actually represents mainstream Arizona's values. Please vote for Donna Gratehouse for AZ State Senate.
And as for John Huppenthal, it's time to come clean, sir, and talk straight with the voters. We deserve better from you. So I join Senator McCain and several news organizations in urging you to fill out the Project VoteSmart questionnaire so we can actually see where you stand on these important issues.
posted by Geo at 9:46 AM
5 Comments:
Have you no shame?
You really ought to be embarrassed. You're invoking John McCain's name in a way he would never approve of or agree with. If John McCain read your post, I'm sure he would disagree with your claim to be "standing" with him.
The truth is, John McCain is a friend of John Huppenthal. McCain released a statement supporting Huppenthal that says: '"John is a straight shooter and an honorable man. And, like me, he does not cave into powerful special interests. He is a true fighter for the taxpayer."
There are many candidate surveys out there, including some sponsored by the newspaper. This particular survey you're referring to is just one of many out-of-state surveys candidates receive.
Hi James,
It's really a bummer when it turns out that a politician isn't being 100% consistent in what they say, isn't it?
McCain in one breath says Huppenthal is a "straight shooter" because he wants Huppenthal to win, but on the other hand, McCain is on the Board of a key voter education project to which Huppenthal simply refuses to respond. That's politics, I guess.
But let's talk about Huppenthal, who was the actual topic of the post: you talk about shame and embarrassment. Who is the candidate that is evidently ashamed and embarrassed to answer the survey and put his positions clearly on the record?
Donna Gratehouse, his opponent, has done it. McCain himself has done it, of course. Other candidates who HAVEN'T answered this survey are AT LEAST clearly on the record with their positions stated in other readily available surveys. So they're not hiding their positions from the voters.
So who is the one who is ashamed and embarrassed of where they stand, here? Who is the one actually hiding his positions from the voters?
It's not like Huppenthal hasn't had enough time to figure out or clarify where he stands. He's been in office for years.
And surely he's not really so crunched for time that he can't spend a half-hour to answer it. I mean, he somehow finds time to respond to just about every Letter to the Editor that appears in the paper. He also finds time to respond to a post on this very blog, in depth, referencing legislation he'd like us all to know about. So he's clearly not hurting for time when it comes to sharing what he wants us to know about himself.
And the idea you're suggesting, that this is "just one of many" surveys and not all that important, really isn't supported by the facts. McCain feels that this questionnaire is so important that he actually JOINED the BOARD of Project VoteSmart. I think it's important, too. In that, Senator McCain and I totally agree. And it's totally appropriate to say so, whatever McCain's other comments may be.
So, let's see:
1. Huppenthal knows his positions.
2. He's had ample time to respond to the survey.
3. The survey is a key one in the election for voter education.
That sounds like he's intentionally not answering the survey questions, James. Why is that?
Let's see John Huppenthal step up and go on the record, here. If he is such a "straight shooter", then let's see him deal straight with his constituents and answer this key survey.
My concern? He won't, because he relies on many of his constituents not knowing exactly how extreme he is on many subjects. This is in line with the article I posted.
So far, I've seen him playing the kind of games to which that article refers: cherry-picking your legislative record to make it seem you support something, when your actual positions are quite contradictory. And refusing to answer important candidate surveys so your actual positions can't be pinned down.
Of course, if I'm mistaken, and Huppenthal HAS answered such a survey elsewhere that outlines his position clearly - and in as binary terms as possible - on things such as Social Security, school vouchers, etc., then please direct me to it. I'm happy to be corrected on this point.
Respectfully,
Geo
Thank you for responding to my post.
John McCain and other famous folks have lent their name to a well meaning out-of-state outfit that sends out surveys to hundreds of candidates. As the New York Times has pointed out, candidates routinely skip filling out this survey. I'd say this is more a case of a survey being irrelevant than any candidate trying to hide something.
Candidates get asked their positions on issues over and over, and the newspaper does a pretty good job of spelling out where candidates stand on issues of the day. In this day and age, its pretty much impossible for a candidate to "hide" their position on anything for long.
According to your post, this survey asking about issues like Social Security. And that is relevant to the position of State Representative how? That's a federal issue.
Its OK if you don't like Republicans, but I think some of your attacks on Huppenthal really go over the line. This is a guy who apparently works hard at his job and speaks his mind. What do legislators make these days? $20 or $25 K? The grief they get and the time they invest can't possibly be worth it.
Hi James,
You make a number of statements that really don't seem to be supportable.
1. This survey is not "irrelevant" as you say. It's one of the key candidate issue surveys in our country. McCain evidently considered it relevant enough to answer it AND serve on the Board for the VoteSmart project.
2. Huppenthal has not, anywhere else that I can tell, answered a survey that clearly states his positions. What he has done, rather, is continuously refer to bits and pieces of legislation that he's worked on in order to "answer" questions about where he stands. If you read that NYT article, you'll note that they said, as I did, that some candidates prefer this approach because it allows them to be vague and ambiguous about their exact stance on positions.
Instead, they can talk around an issue in half-truths or misleading statements, or cherry-pick past legislation to give a vague or even misleading impression of where they exactly stand on issues.
Perfect example: when Huppenthal was asked in the recent Clean Elections debate "Do you favor All-Day Kindergarten", what was his response? Did he give a binary "No" which would have been a straight-talking, clear answer that reflects his position?
No, he didn't. He responded that "It was in a budget that he was proud to vote for, so it's a done deal." If you hadn't been following his legislative career, you would be forgiven for thinking that meant he supported it, like 75% of us Arizonans.
Only thing is, he DOESN'T support it. He's campaigned vociferously against it. And it was only when the issue came around on the next round of questions that he clarified that he admitted that he didn't like All Day K.
Can you see the tactic he used here to initially obfuscate his real position? It's a great example of political doublespeak.
This is exactly what I'm talking about. In various ways, candidates can conceal where they actually stand on an issue. It's only when they are given a survey and asked to respond, in a binary yes/no or a "check box if agree" that you will get a clear, unambiguous read of where they stand.
Huppenthal doesn't seem inclined to do this, in ANY survey I can find, not just the VoteSmart one.
Unless, as I say, you know of another survey where Huppenthal has clearly laid out these kind of unambiguous responses. In that case, please direct me to it, since I'm keen to find out where he stands on some issues that he's been playing coy with.
Indeed, one wonders why anyone would seriously defend Huppenthal's refusal to answer a rather straightforward candidate survey on where he stands. Such clear and unambiguous communication with the voters would seem to be a minimum criterion for any candidate being labeled a "straight talker."
Respectfully,
Geo
For what it's worth, I'd also note that Huppenthal is conspicuously absent from the AZ Republic's candidate survey, as well.
His oppponent, Donna Gratehouse, has done the voters the courtesy of completing both the Project VoteSmart and AZ Republic surveys.
Post a Comment
<< Home