Is This Lawmaker Too Conservative for the Tea Party?

Tim Huelskamp is ultra-conservative. So is his district. But he may lose his seat anyway.

This photo can only be used with the Joe Schmoe piece that originally ran on 2/3/2015. Rep. Tim Huelskamp, R-Kan., attends a forum in Rayburn called a Conversations with Conservatives to discuss issues including appropriations and the upcoming reconciliation package.
National Journal
Jack Fitzpatrick
Add to Briefcase
Jack Fitzpatrick
Feb. 2, 2015, 3 p.m.

On pa­per, it’s a per­fect mar­riage. Kan­sas’ 1st Con­gres­sion­al Dis­trict is about as con­ser­vat­ive as they come — and so is its cur­rent rep­res­ent­at­ive: Tim Huel­skamp.

Huel­skamp voted against in­creas­ing the debt ceil­ing in 2013 and against the 2014 budget com­prom­ise, and he re­ceived a 92 per­cent score from the con­ser­vat­ive Her­it­age Found­a­tion — one of the highest scores for any House or Sen­ate mem­ber in the last Con­gress. He also spent his first two terms in open de­fi­ance of House Speak­er John Boehner, with his most fam­ous stunt com­ing in 2013, when he sat on the House floor taunt­ing the speak­er with a list of names of fel­low House Re­pub­lic­ans he said planned to vote against him.

Mean­while, the dis­trict Huel­skamp rep­res­ents, a sprawl­ing, ag­ri­cul­tur­al area cov­er­ing most of Kan­sas, has held a sim­il­arly con­ser­vat­ive line: Mitt Rom­ney won 70 per­cent of the dis­trict in 2012, and the Cook Polit­ic­al Re­port’s par­tis­an vot­ing in­dex ranks it as the 18th most con­ser­vat­ive dis­trict in the coun­try.

But just over four years in, Huel­skamp’s re­la­tion­ship with the dis­trict is strained, and it seems pos­sible, if not likely, that they’re on track for a 2016 di­vorce.

Huel­skamp struggled to win his primary last cycle, des­pite fa­cing an un­known chal­lenger with no polit­ic­al ex­per­i­ence. And his op­pon­ents, em­boldened by that close call, have already star­ted talk­ing about a bet­ter or­gan­ized ef­fort to beat him in 2016. Judging by the kind of op­pos­i­tion he has at­trac­ted — as well as his close call in such a con­ser­vat­ive dis­trict — it is ap­par­ent that he hasn’t just rankled mod­er­ates. One of the most tea party-friendly dis­tricts in the coun­try has pushed back against Huel­skamp.

So what went wrong?

To Huel­skamp, it’s an is­sue of out­side in­ter­fer­ence from a ter­ri­fied GOP es­tab­lish­ment, the wrath of Boehner and oth­er “busi­ness-as-usu­al politi­cians” (as Huel­skamp calls them) who are des­per­ate to si­lence the rebel voice.

That doesn’t ex­plain, however, why Huel­skamp’s crit­ics with­in the tea party have soured on him. They say it’s not Huel­skamp’s true-be­liev­er polit­ics — it’s his scorched-earth style, a pesky-kid-on-cam­pus per­sona that they say has made him an in­ef­fec­tu­al sideshow rather than a force for con­ser­vat­ive val­ues. It was Huel­skamp’s clashes with Boehner that cost him his seat on the Ag­ri­cul­ture Com­mit­tee. Huel­skamp claimed party lead­er­ship kept a score­card of mem­bers’ votes; Rep. Lynn West­mo­re­land said Huel­skamp and oth­ers lost their com­mit­tee as­sign­ments be­cause of “the a-hole factor.”

But the fo­cus on Huel­skamp’s fail­ure to keep his com­mit­tee seat opens a third pos­sib­il­ity: Per­haps the tea parti­ers aren’t angry that Huel­skamp broke his prom­ises; maybe they’re furi­ous be­cause he kept them. Huel­skamp ran on a pledge to make zero com­prom­ises in hold­ing a hard con­ser­vat­ive line. That comes at a cost, both for his stand­ing with­in the party and for his abil­ity to de­liv­er be­ne­fits to his home dis­trict. And back home, that may cost him sup­port from es­tab­lish­ment and tea-party Re­pub­lic­ans alike. Tea parti­ers buy gro­cer­ies just like every­one else, and when polit­ic­al ideo­logy com­petes with a paycheck, politi­cians who side with the former are al­most al­ways destined for trouble.

The “Boehner Con­spir­acy” The­ory

Ac­cord­ing to Huel­skamp, he’s still close with the au­then­t­ic con­ser­vat­ives; it’s es­tab­lish­ment forces mas­quer­ad­ing as tea-party faith­ful that are mak­ing trouble.

Alan LaPo­lice, who chal­lenged Huel­skamp in 2014 and might do so again, de­scribes him­self as a con­ser­vat­ive, but he was backed by ag­ri­cul­tur­al in­terests last cycle. And the op­pos­i­tion’s fa­vor­ite pro­spect­ive can­did­ate, phys­i­cian Ro­ger Mar­shall, sim­il­arly has de­scribed him­self as “very con­ser­vat­ive” and a “God-fear­ing Chris­ti­an,” but has also avoided an­ger­ing the Re­pub­lic­an es­tab­lish­ment or po­ten­tial donors, said Huel­skamp cam­paign spokes­man Mark Kelly.

Huel­skamp noted that Mar­shall an­nounced he might enter the race shortly after Huel­skamp voted against John Boehner for speak­er of the House. “It’s no sur­prise that Mr. Mar­shall an­nounced his in­terest with­in a week of my vote for new lead­er­ship in the U.S. House,” Huel­skamp said in a state­ment. Boehner and oth­er mem­bers of the es­tab­lish­ment want “an­oth­er busi­ness-as-usu­al politi­cian” who will go along with the status quo, he said.

(Huel­skamp also cited Mar­shall’s “his­tory of writ­ing big checks to lib­er­al Re­pub­lic­ans,” al­though those dona­tions gen­er­ally went to oth­er mem­bers of Kan­sas’s con­gres­sion­al del­eg­a­tion, and even in­cluded $750 to Huel­skamp him­self between 2010 and 2012, ac­cord­ing to the Cen­ter for Re­spons­ive Polit­ics.)

Des­pite his trouble in 2014, Huel­skamp still has sup­port from some tea-party groups. Adam Brandon, ex­ec­ut­ive vice pres­id­ent of Freedom­Works, said Huel­skamp has an “amaz­ing” re­cord, al­though the group is not mak­ing en­dorse­ments yet. And Craig Ga­bel, pres­id­ent of Kansans for Liberty, called Huel­skamp “the real deal” and said voters should re­spect that he’s but­ted heads with Boehner.

The “Some People Are Just Jerks” The­ory

But there are groups that have stood with oth­er tea party can­did­ates that have had enough of Huel­skamp.

Shortly be­fore his 2014 primary, the Now or Nev­er PAC, which has sup­por­ted can­did­ates such as former Rep. Joe Walsh of Illinois, a tea-party fa­vor­ite, spent about $230,000 run­ning an at­tack ad against him. The spot, fea­tur­ing Con­es­toga En­ergy CEO Tom Wil­lis, said Huel­skamp “has put per­son­al polit­ics ahead of Kan­sas pro­du­cers,” cit­ing Huel­skamp los­ing his spot on the Ag­ri­cul­ture Com­mit­tee and vot­ing against mul­tiple ver­sions of the farm bill. Wil­lis also said in the ad that when he con­fron­ted Huel­skamp about his ac­tions, “he re­spon­ded by threat­en­ing me and my com­pany.” Wil­lis later told the Topeka Cap­it­al-Journ­al that Huel­skamp said, “I will make you pay when I get back to D.C.,” which Huel­skamp has denied.

Trav­is Smith, a con­sult­ant with Ax­iom Strategies who said he “ran the ef­fort” for Now or Nev­er PAC, said the push was made by “key ag donors.” Smith said that the back­lash against Huel­skamp isn’t based on his con­ser­vat­ive re­cord, but rather on his in­ab­il­ity to be an ef­fect­ive le­gis­lat­or. “There really is a way some­body could have taken the same votes and not struggled in the primary, with a dif­fer­ent at­ti­tude,” Smith said.

Smith hin­ted that Now or Nev­er PAC could get in­volved again in 2016 if a strong chal­lenger enters the race. “Ob­vi­ously now that we came with­in 10 points there’s blood in the wa­ter,” he said. “Every­body wants to run against him, and if it’s a good can­did­ate the money will be there.”

The “Keep­ing It Real Gone Wrong” The­ory

For all the com­plaints about Huel­skamp’s “style,” however, the first sin that his Kan­sas crit­ics point to is, again, that his Boehner-bait­ing got him kicked off the House Ag­ri­cul­ture Com­mit­tee.

That left Kan­sas — a state that grows its own in­land ocean of wheat — without a rep­res­ent­at­ive on the pan­el for the first time in more than a cen­tury, ac­cord­ing to the Cap­it­al-Journ­al. As a res­ult, the Kan­sas Farm Bur­eau and oth­er ag­ri­cul­tur­al in­terest groups pulled their sup­port for Huel­skamp in 2014. (Huel­skamp was raised on a farm and earned a Ph.D. in polit­ic­al sci­ence con­cen­trat­ing on ag­ri­cul­ture policy.)

The pan­el’s most prom­in­ent job is craft­ing the Farm Bill, a le­gis­lat­ive be­hemoth that, in its 2014 in­carn­a­tion, would dole out nearly $1 tril­lion (over five years) in spend­ing on farm sub­sidies, food stamps, and oth­er pro­grams. And by keep­ing re­li­able rep­res­ent­a­tion on the pan­el, Kansans have pro­tec­ted key sup­ports for wheat and oth­er farm­ers.

Re­con­cil­ing fed­er­al farm sup­ports with a polit­ic­al philo­sophy that calls for the gov­ern­ment to largely keep out of the eco­nomy is dif­fi­cult, if not im­possible. But that doesn’t mean Huel­skamp can af­ford to deal his dis­trict out when it comes time to pick the re­cip­i­ents of those sup­ports. “It’s mainly an ag­ri­cul­tur­al dis­trict,” Clayton Bark­er, ex­ec­ut­ive dir­ect­or of the Kan­sas Re­pub­lic­an Party, said of Kan­sas’ 1st. “And that be­comes the big con­cern for voters. It’s their pock­et­book is­sue.”

It’s a mod­ern ver­sion of a near-ax­io­mat­ic fea­ture of fisc­al policy: Voters are gen­er­ally bullish on cut­ting “gov­ern­ment spend­ing,” but that en­thu­si­asm dis­sip­ates when it is time to cut the por­tions of gov­ern­ment spend­ing that voters count on to sup­port their house­holds. The same is likely true for tea parti­ers: They pro­fess to hate the Wash­ing­ton game, but as long as it keeps go­ing on, they want their rep­res­ent­at­ive to play.

What We're Following See More »
PASSED ON SO-CALLED "SAR" REPORTS
FinCen Official Charged with Leaking Info on Manafort, Gates
35 minutes ago
THE DETAILS
"A senior official working for the Treasury Department's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) has been charged with leaking confidential financial reports on former Trump campaign advisers Paul Manafort, Richard Gates and others to a media outlet. Prosecutors say that Natalie Mayflower Sours Edwards, a senior adviser to FinCEN, photographed what are called suspicious activity reports, or SARs, and other sensitive government files and sent them to an unnamed reporter, in violation of U.S. law."
Source:
SMOKE REPORTED ONBOARD
Melania Trump's Plane Lands Safely After Mechanical Issue
4 hours ago
THE LATEST
PROBING COLLUSION AND OBSTRUCTION
Mueller To Release Key Findings After Midterms
4 hours ago
THE LATEST

"Special Counsel Robert Mueller is expected to issue findings on core aspects of his Russia probe soon after the November midterm elections ... Specifically, Mueller is close to rendering judgment on two of the most explosive aspects of his inquiry: whether there were clear incidents of collusion between Russia and Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign, and whether the president took any actions that constitute obstruction of justice." Mueller has faced pressure to wrap up the investigation from Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, said an official, who would receive the results of the investigation and have "some discretion in deciding what is relayed to Congress and what is publicly released," if he remains at his post.

Source:
SCENE APPEARED TO HAVE BEEN CLEANED, SANITIZED
Turks Say They Found Evidence that Khashoggi Was Killed in Embassy
1 days ago
THE LATEST
SAYS MBS CAN NEVER BE A WORLD LEADER
Graham Threatens Sanctions on Saudi Arabia
1 days ago
THE LATEST

“I’m not going back to Saudi Arabia as long as" Mohammed Bin Salman is in charge, Sen. Lindsey Graham said on Fox News today. “I’ve been their biggest defender on the floor of the United States Senate. This guy is a wrecking ball. He had [Khashoggi] murdered in a consulate in Turkey and to expect me to ignore it, I feel used and abused. The MBS figure is to me toxic, he can never be a world leader on the world stage.” Graham added that he intends to "sanction the hell out of Saudi Arabia.”

Source:
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login