Why Senator Hatch No Longer Represents Me

Retire Hatch. That was the mantra Utahns heard from FreedomWorks several weeks ago just before the Utah Caucuses. I am not a donor of FreedomWorks and I am not a leader in any of the major parties.  I like to think of myself as just an average Utah conservative.  That said, the FreedomWorks statistics intrigued me. Did Senator Orrin Hatch really vote to raise the debt ceiling 16 times and did those raises really amount to $7.5 trillion? If it was true, then this added one more reason to my belief that Hatch no longer represents me.

I have been an audit and compliance professional for 12 years and we have a saying in that industry--“trust but verify.” So, as a private citizen, I decided to do my own homework on FreedomWorks’ assertions.  

What did I learn? I learned that, while all data is subject to some interpretation, for several years Hatch voted consistently to the raise the debt ceiling. Using information from the Congressional Research staff and the congressional record itself, going back to 1978, the year after Hatch went into office, the record shows that Hatch voted “Yes” or via “Unanimous Consent” to raise the debt ceiling 20 times for a total of $7.9 trillion dollars.  If you include “Voice Votes,” that total rises to 37 times and $8.8 trillion. In all, federal debt has risen over $14 trillion since Hatch has been in office (and it is still rising).

Frankly, I was stunned. $14 trillion? A little more math shows this is the equivalent of Senator Hatch handing a bill for $45,000 to every man, woman, and child in the state of Utah (that is $224,000 for a family of 5).  And that bill is just for debt—it does not include the money required for ongoing expenditures. Where is the country going to get that kind of money? Certainly, even “the rich” cannot help pay for that kind of debt. Where was the “conservative” Senator Hatch when all of this was going on? He was voting “yes.”

The bottom line is that FreedomWorks pretty much got this statistic right. Wow.

However, as I mentioned earlier, this is just one more reason why I believe that Hatch no longer represents me.  My disillusionment with the Senator’s voting record actually started back in the year 2000 when, during that re-election year, Hatch was touting his experience on the Judiciary committee. It did not take a legal scholar to recognize that this so-called “power” was not being used to advance conservatism.  Hatch was not opposing Clinton appointees nor was he pressuring the administration for more conservative judges. In truth, he was actually approving liberal appointments.  What I did not know then, but know now is that Hatch not only voted to seat Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsberg--two of the most liberal judges on the Supreme Court--he is proud of the fact his suggested them to President Clinton.

Then, in mid-2001, came the embryonic stem-cell debate. I am unashamed to say that I believe life begins at conception and I believe a majority of Utahns hold this belief. We can quote one of our beloved leaders, a renowned medical doctor, as saying, “Life begins when two germ cells unite to become one cell … A continuum of growth results in a new human being. The onset of life is not a debatable issue, but a fact of science.”[1] What did Senator Hatch do with that belief? He shunned it and became one of only a handful of Republican Senators to join a large number of Democrats in urging President Bush to reverse the ban on embryo destruction and allow scientists to use human embryos for research. Thank goodness President Bush held his ground on life and upheld the ban. What is not well-known is that when Barak Obama became President, the ban was lifted and embryos are now being destroyed in the name of science. Senator Orrin Hatch is officially on the same page as President Barak Obama on this issue.

About 10 years ago a columnist at the Deseret News wrote, “it's time to quit calling Hatch a conservative. He's a moderate on social issues — and him siding with liberals [should no longer be a surprise].”[2] Do Utah conservatives honestly want to give Senator Hatch six more years as a lame-duck senator during which time he could do what he pleases? Be as liberal as he wants with no checks on how he could vote? I think not.  In my view, it is time to look at conservative alternatives. Thank goodness this election year we, the average conservative voters of Utah, have a choice and if we choose, we can elect Dan Liljenquist and "Retire Hatch."

---

[1] Elder Russell M. Nelson, April 1985 General Conference, “Reverence for Life” and October 2008 Liahona, “Abortion: An Assault on the Defenseless.”

[2] Lee Davidson, Deseret News, May 8, 2002.

A David Versus Goliath GOP Primary

David versus Goliath is a common story. It is the tale of someone weak taking on someone who is large and powerful.  From the outset, the assumption is that the big guy will clobber the small one.


This year’s Utah GOP primary is truly a David versus Goliath narrative—Dan Liljenquist’s $770,000 versus Orrin Hatch’s $9.2 million.  For us “Davids”—average Utahns who would like to see Mr. Liljenquist become the next GOP US Senate nominee in Utah—those numbers alone are enough to make our almost penniless task seem hopeless. 

But is it truly hopeless?  Let’s look at a couple of circumstances.  First, Mr. Hatch took two distinct advantages with him when he went into the GOP convention this past April.  Number one, he spent $5.5 million wooing delegates. Number two, he used his substantial influence and knowledge of the Utah caucus system to pack the delegate count in his favor. Did either of these strategies work? No. After two ballots he failed to reach the magic 60% he needed to win the nomination outright. Some would say this was miracle number one.

When looked at a little more closely, this “non-knockout” is significant for a couple of reasons.  First, it showed that not all Utahns could be bought.  In Round 1 of the voting Senator Hatch received 2243 votes. Divide that into $5.5 million and each of these votes “cost” him about $2,500.  While Mr. Liljenquist’s votes only “cost” a fraction of that at about $225/vote.  Any good businessman would take note of such a differential. The “cost savings” on the Liljenquist side is dramatic.

Next, in the second round Hatch only picked up 70 additional votes, about a 3% increase, while Mr. Liljenquist picked up 487, or a whopping 44% increase.  Again, a businessman would notice there is something special going on with Liljenquist.

Why the dramatic differences in cost and vote counts?

Here are a few of my theories why these disparities occurred.  First, I believe message mattered more than money.  No matter how much he spent, Hatch could not defeat the rising anti-incumbent, pro-conservative, pro-accountability message.

Second, people are finally starting to wake up and see Mr. Hatch’s record for what it is.  For years he slid by on personality and name recognition and the citizens of this state listened.  All the while he was supporting bailouts, rising debt, and earmarks such as “bridges to nowhere.” He was also failing to push for conservative justices and protect human life at its very beginnings.  While some of us have known these facts for years, finally the serious problems in Washington are forcing the voting public to wake up with regards to Hatch’s actual record and to, finally, see that he has contributed significantly to what is now a national crisis.

Third, principles are (finally!) starting to matter more than people. Despite all the loyal fans of Hatch that were present at that the convention with their $2,500 worth of hats and scarves and shirts, principle won the day.  Hatch’s voting record was obviously an issue.  However, that was not enough.  Being “against” someone is not as powerful as being “for” someone else.  On April 21, Mr. Liljenquist stood before thousands of delegates and informed citizens and made an excellent case for his enthusiasm and leadership. He spoke passionately about principles such as fiscal responsibly, corporate turnarounds, conservative values, and Utah statesmen (who live here) representing Utah, not career Washington politicians (who live there).

The results? On April 21, $5.5 million dollars could not deliver a knockout punch in Hatch’s favor while about $250,000 gave the citizens of Utah a real choice. This was because it does not matter how much you spend on your message, what matters most is the message itself.

Looking ahead things may still seem hopeless for us Davids. Staring $9.2 million in the face is not an easy task. However, there is hope. In fact, Utahns have the chance to do something very special over the next four weeks. We have the chance to show that principles are stronger than tradition, politics, and personality, and that message really does matter more than money.  We have the chance to show Washington that our votes cannot be bought—that we are as smart or smarter than they are.  We can show Washington that voting records matter more than name recognition. We can show Washington that grass roots are more powerful than multi-million dollar commercials.

What we sometimes forget when referring to the story of David and Goliath is this—David won.  On June 26, Dan Liljenquiest can be the David of this story. Together, he and his supporters (us!) can tell the Goliath, Senator Hatch and his multi-million dollar donors, “that right makes might” (thank you Abraham Lincoln). All of us can rise up and say, “Senator Hatch, we appreciate your years of service, but it is time to come home.”

We can win this thing. And when we win, Utah wins, too.