Too much ‘fight’ in Cotton’s campaigning

Dear Congressman Cotton:

Conventional political wisdom buttressed by successive survey data suggests that you represent one of the best opportunities Republicans have in their effort to take over the U.S. Senate this election year. This is certainly welcome news for you as you zero in on politically taking out incumbent U.S. Sen. Mark Pryor.

However, as seasoned political eyes take a closer look at your campaign so far, an ambivalent feeling emerges: that of admiration and disbelief.

Admiration not only for your military service to your country but also because, as a relatively green politician, you have for the most part displayed an amazing amount of discipline befitting the soldier that you are. That quality is a rare virtue that political operatives love to see in a candidate.

Admiration also because you have been making the right strategic moves so far: The Pryor campaign wants to get you off your game by engaging in a discussion about the issue of violence against women? You don’t take the bait. The Pryor campaign tries to engage you in a back and forth on the issue of equal pay for women? You take a pass. The Pryor campaign wants to lure you into a discussion about campaign finance by panning the wealthy out-of-state donors who are bankrolling your campaign? You dodge and you stick to your campaign script that focuses on tying Pryor to Obama and to Obamacare whose unpopularity is sky high in Arkansas.

Now, this is where the admiration for your campaign performance so far ends and where the feeling of disbelief toward your campaign commences. Though you have been mostly playing your campaign cards right, you have been doing so at the expense of a vigorous and substantive debate that Arkansas voters deserve to see between Pryor and you. It seems as if you are more interested in running against someone (Pryor and/or Obama) and something (Obamacare) than running for something.

What substantive policy agenda are you offering against Pryor’s? What are your solutions for the major issues facing Arkansas and America today? Not only do you not provide a set of clear and realistic policies, but also you only regurgitate campaign talking points ad nauseam.

Poll-tested talking points and other vacuous platitudes seem to be your substitutes for serious policy proposals. Your solution to fixing Obamacare? “Repeal and replace.” Cute slogan, but “replace” with what exactly?

Your position on immigration reform and the bipartisan bill that the U.S. Senate overwhelming passed last year? “No ‘Amnesty’ and secure the borders first.” Ok. This sounds good, but it’s not a substantive policy that fully solves an enduring problem. How exactly are you going to handle the millions of undocumented immigrants who are currently in the country? Throw them all in jail or deport them all?

Your key solution to the nation’s growing debt? “Passing a balanced budget Amendment.” Sounds good! Most common-sense Americans would certainly agree to that. But, how exactly are you going to make this proposal a reality? “I will do my part to persuade 38 states to ratify the Amendment,” you declare. What is that “part’” you will do? Besides, before we even get to the ratification part of the proposed Constitutional Amendment how specifically would you get the 2/3 of both Houses of Congress or the 2/3 of state legislatures needed to formally propose a Constitutional Amendment? You get the drift, don’t you? Your campaign talking points sound good, but they are likely unrealistic in the foreseeable future.

To drive my point home, let’s take your proposal to repeal Obamacare. You (ought to) know that you are not going to repeal Obamacare if for no other reason than the fact that it is unlikely for the Republicans to get the 290 members of the House of Representatives and the 67 Senators needed to override the likely presidential veto of a potential Obamacare repeal bill. Besides, in the 2016 general election not only would the demographics and voter turnout be more favorable to the Democrats, but also the Republicans would be defending more Senate seats in 2016 than would the Democrats (24 seats vs. 10 seats) – which could lead to the Democrats picking up enough U.S. Senate seats to retake control of the Senate if the Democrats were to lose the Senate this year.

In addition to your poll-tested and vacuous talking points, you seem to mistake the U.S. Congress in general and the U.S. Senate in particular as a war zone. You keep asking Arkansans to send you to the U.S. Senate so that you can “fight” to repeal Obamacare, cut spending, reduce taxes, and protect our values. Unlike other politicians who often use the verb “(to) fight” lightly, you seem to be so enamored with the verb “(to) fight” that you use it in virtually most if not all of your stump speeches. Congressman, though you mean to use this verb as a metaphor, you (ought to) know that the U.S. Congress in general or the U.S. Senate in particular is not a battlefield.

You (ought to) know that the reason why the U.S. Senate is often referred to as the “world’s greatest deliberative body” is because throughout most of its history the U.S. Senate has been a place where Senators work in a conciliatory and constructive manner to solve the nation’s problems. U.S. Senators tend to be more inclined than members of the U.S. House of Representatives to strike policy deals to address the pressing issues that the nation faces.

Being confrontational and saying “No” all the time as you seem to do doesn’t quite cut it. Constantly “fighting” as you promise to do in the U.S. Senate if you were to be elected doesn’t quite cut it. If the other 99 Senators adopted the same “my way or the highway” attitude as you have, the U.S. Senate would indeed become a war zone where substantive policy achievements are collateral damages.

By the way, let’s take a look at the results of your “fights” in the U.S. House of Representatives during the less than two years you’ve spent there: You have sponsored nine bills, one House Joint Resolution, and an Amendment to a bill. The nine bills and the House Joint Resolution that you have sponsored were sent to specialized committees to die a natural death. The Amendment you sponsored did pass the House of Representatives, but the bill itself is still lingering in the Senate where it is given a 31% chance of being enacted. What substantive legislative initiatives and achievements do you have to show for all your “fights” in the House of Representatives? Nothing.

Congressman, don’t just be an opportunist bent on demagoguing his way to the U.S. Senate thanks in no small part to Pryor’s (mis) handling of his vote for Obamacare. Don’t just be a warrior bent on fighting his way to the U.S. Senate and stoking the gridlock in the U. S. Senate.

You are a former military leader whose heroic actions have won fights and earned medals, but now you must learn to transition into a political leader who proposes a substantive and realistic policy agenda. When campaigning, it is easy for you to give poll-tested talking points and to promise to fight, but should you win your U.S. Senate race against Pryor, you would soon realize that governing is much more difficult and that you would have sold pipe dreams to Arkansas voters.

Captain Cotton, stand down. Candidate Cotton, step forward with a substantive and realistic policy agenda.