While I often (or at least sometimes) agree with Fleischman’s posts, I’m going to have to take issue with the last one on former Congressman Brian Bilbray. Sometimes the Orange Curtain is pretty thick. First: disclosure on the table. I work for Bilbray. He was also MY Congressman for years when I lived in the City of San Diego. These comments are from my second role, rather than my first.
Congressman Bilbray was a consistent voice – often a voice in the wilderness – against illegal immigration throughout the 1990’s. Note that Bilbray represented a Democrat seat when he was defeated in the 2000 bloodbath. His ongoing crusade was not always an easy one.
After the 2000 elections Bilbray did not stop talking about illegal immigration. On the contrary, if any thing he upped the ante. He not only became a consultant and legislative advocate for the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), he served on their Board of Advisors and helped them craft their national policy agenda. There is a reason the National Border Patrol Council (10,000 Border agents) choose to endorse Bilbray in the 50th district – his credentials are real, and as someone who knows him, heartfelt. Unlike some of the other candidates in the race, illegal immigration as an issue for Bilbray is not opportunism.
March 9th, 2006 at 12:00 am
Actually, my issue is not with the “Immigration Reform” part of Bilbray’s “Immigration Reform Consultant” ballot title, but rather the idea that someone’s full time profession is that they are a registered federal lobbyist on a multitude of issues, but that their ballot title doesn’t convey that.
Anyways, I haven’t really weighed in at all on Bilbray and his ideology/positions on issues. I probably could and should do that, given that he is remarkably more liberal on social issues than his major opponents.
That said, probably my biggest question for Bilbray, which I would have for pretty much anyone was has served in Congress, like he has — how do they justify the 33% growth in federal spending since Republicans ‘recaptured’ the House in 1994? I’m not saying that Bilbray is responsible for that, but a good amount of that increase occured while he was thare, under Republican leaders who have endorsed Bilbray.
I’m looking for someone who is headed to Washington who starts off frustrated and mad at the failure of the current Republican leadership in Congress to REDUCE federal spending, not someone who will go back and spend his first month in Congress thanking the insiders for re-electing him.
I don’t live in the 50th, and haven’t endorsed a candidate. But if Bilbray wants the support of people like me, he will need to explain why our Republican majority in Congress has presided over such an increase in federal spending.
March 9th, 2006 at 12:00 am
Great Duane, he’s going to go back and fight for one good conseravtive cause and everything else he will be Republican lite on….i.e. he’s for gun control, pro abortion, pro increase in spending, “wants to bring home the bacon”. No thanks. You might as well vote for a Democrat if you want those priorities.
March 9th, 2006 at 12:00 am
While I don’t always like to march lockstep with my friend Duane Dichiara, in this case I must. The court did the absolute right thing in letting Bilbray use his legitimate ballot title. Bilbray has been a leader on this issue since the 1980’s. He has spent the last 6 years working on theses issues in D.C. for the premier immigration reform organization in the country. What we need to focus on is Eric Roach, a guy who most have never heard of until last month. Mr. Roach’s first act in the public arena; to run to the courts and sue the voters of San Diego because he did not get his way. Nice. I will have more on Roach later….much more
March 9th, 2006 at 12:00 am
No, Phil, Eric Roach’s first act in response to the corruption and bribery that has rocked that district was to run to the voters with a pledge to not take one dime of money from any PAC or even a committee or candidate that has taken PAC money. He even went so far as to show he really meant it by promising to not seek reelection if he ever violates that pledge.
The response has been overwhelming and I don’t think you can point to another one of the 18 candidates that has done the same!
That and his faithfullness to Republican principles, is what will beat the liberal democrat in June, not the “I am not a lobbyist even though I am registered in Washington DC and took about $290,000 in compensation over the past few years, so vote for me” theme that Brian is using.
March 9th, 2006 at 12:00 am
Jon, I have to disagree with you. In 2005, over half of Brian’s income came from FAIR and lobbying represented only a small amount of the time he spent working with FAIR. As Duane wrote, Bilbray worked with FAIR to develop their national policy strategy and serves on their National Board of Advisors. The filing of this case had more to do with a mystery millionaire candidate and his trial lawyers trying to deprive an opponent of much-needed funds, than about any legitimate dispute with the ballot title.
One more thing, when Brian Bilbray left Congress in 2000, our nation had a balanced budget. Sadly, the spending increases you refer to came over the last five years under a Republican President.
March 9th, 2006 at 12:00 am
Bilbray’s principles on a number of issues were always flexible and adaptable to the views of his district – which, in its own way, is not necessarily a bad thing in a legislator. However, his views on illegal immigration and other issues involving Mexico – especially unwelcome effluent from Tijuana – have been extremely consistent.
If Bilbray makes it, his proven adaptability to the district he serves indicates that he’d probably be more conservative than he was when he represented the old 49th. If his ideology is flexible, his character is certainly more palatable than Phil Paule’s favorite candidate in that race (LOL).