The Kansas Governor's race is one of national intrigue. But on paper, it should be the easiest race in the entire United States to predict. The incumbent is a Republican. He won the office in a landslide championing the modern Republican platform. He was a Republican Presidential candidate and was elected to represent Kansas in the United States Senate in two landslide elections. Before that, he was elected to represent the state in the United States House of Representatives. Furthermore, the platform he ran on to become governor, was something he carried out. However, in the vast majority of polls that have been released covering this race, the incumbent Republican governor has trailed his Democrat challenger.
While the race has centered exclusively around the Democrat challenger and the Republican incumbent, the Libertarian candidate has made some buzz around social media. It seems interesting, that even though he's attended the gubernatorial debates, the news media seems quite a bit less interested in his candidacy, and most polls have neglected to even mention him. This makes the polls very hard to seriously consider. Libertarian candidates fit very well with the new Republican fiscal and economic policy hardliners and they also appeal to the modern Democrat voter on issues of reproduction and same-sex policies. With a very unpopular governor who has a lot of money in his war chest to attack his biggest challenger, how many prospective voters might break away from the R vs. D spectrum and take a gamble and vote Libertarian?
KANSAS GOVERNOR
AUTHORITY:
The Governor of the state of Kansas's office derives its authority from Article 1, Section 1 of the Kansas State Constitution.
DUTIES:
The Governor is the chief executive of Kansas. Name a department, and the governor is probably responsible for the office's administration. It is the most high profile office in the state and for good reason. The Governor of Kansas is modeled off the President of the United States. Laws cannot pass without his authorization (unless there is a veto proof majority) and his office is very influential regarding the rest of the state's politics. Many voters may not know who their elected representatives are, but they do know who the governor is. With that advantage, the governor is often in a position to put public pressure on lesser office holders.
THE CANDIDATES
(R) Sam Brownback (Incumbent) - When it comes to Kansas politics, there may not be a bigger name in the history of the state than Sam Brownback (Eisenhower wasn't a political actor in Kansas before becoming President). Yes, even bigger than former Senator and Republican Presidential nominee, Bob Dole. Brownback is currently holding an office Dole never did, and has been a much more controversial politician, both within the state and nationally. The incumbent previously held Dole's old senate seat, being elected to two terms.
Before his time in the United States Senate, Brownback served in Congress from 1995 - 96 as a member of the United States House of Representatives. Prior to his 20 year full-time political career, Brownback was employed by the state of Kansas as the Secretary of Agriculture (1986-1990 and 1991-1993) and the federal government in the White House Fellow program detailed to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (1990-1991, returning his Secretary of Agriculture after his fellowship commenced). He spent four years in the private sector as an attorney and broadcaster in Manhattan, KS after graduating from Kansas State University in 1979 and the University of Kansas School of Law in 1982. The governor, ironically for being a champion of the conservative movement, has made his career in politics.
Sam Brownback's reputation for being a controversial politician can easily be found in news paper and media headlines. As governor, he made Kansas the first state in the country to cut all state funding for the arts. This was incredibly alarming given that it has been well established there is a
correlation between art and high test scores in almost all other subjects. In 2013, the governor reapproved arts funding, but only at
very small fraction of what the original funding was. Also, as governor, Sam Brownback led the controversial "
Great Kansas Republican Purge of 2012" against moderate Republicans that did not go along with his high controversial
tax policy that has left Kansas with huge budget deficits and has caused the
state's credit rating to drop multiple times.
Adding to the governor's political obstacles was the Kansas State Supreme Court's ruling earlier this year that
lack of school funding is unconstitutional. Prior to the decision the governor rejected plans to increase funding and conservatives in the legislature aligned with Brownback issued
threats to the court if they found the lack of funding to be unconstitutional. Amid the controversy, the governor tried to link the issue to his support of all-day kindergarten, but when push came to shove, Brownback effectively
rejected funding that would help this initiative. The governor stated that before signing the request, he would want the legislature to weigh in (knowing the legislature was not in session and allowing the deadline to lapse without action). Recently, Brownback and his fellow conservative law makers have taken credit that funding for Kansas education is at an all time high, but have failed to mention that when the money is subjected to inflation rates, it's actually still far less than pre-Great Recession era funding. Yet, even in the process of complying with Supreme Court's school funding ruling, they managed to take another opportunity to attack their political foes by
ending due process for teachers. Furthermore, the governor has used misleading statistics associated with the KPERS (Kansas Public Employee Retirement Service) pension funding, which Kansas teachers have access to, in order to show that he has increased education funding.
His controversial record does not stop there. In his 1994 campaign for Congress, there was a "mysterious" wave of 'robo-calls' that voters received late at night, wanting to remind voters that
"Jill Docking is a Jew." In the 2008 Presidential Republican primary, Mitt Romney was a victim of similar robo-call
waged by Sam Brownback's campaign in Iowa. What's more, is while serving in the U.S. Senate, Brownback was famously caught switching his votes
more times than this sole video shows. Recently, Brownback's campaign has taken heat from even Kansas Republicans for a state employee, an assistant of Brownback's Lt. Governor, checking Montgomery County records in order to dig up dirt on his opponent and leaking it a local newspaper who ran the story. It's clearly a pattern of behavior for the governor to issue seemingly "cheap" personal attacks on his political rivals that are competing with him in the polls.
(D) Paul Davis - The Democrat challenger was a bit of an unknown before he announced his intention to run for governor. Davis received his bachelor's degree from the University of Kansas and then went on to earn his law degree from Washburn University. He is partner in the Lawrence, KS based law firm Fagan, Emert, and Davis, LLC and has served in the Kansas State House of Representatives since 2003. Davis became the House Minority Leader in 2008 and before becoming a member of the state legislature, he worked as the Assistant Director of Governmental Affairs for Insurance Commissioner Kathleen Sebelius (former Kansas Governor and United States Secretary of Health and Human Services). During his undergraduate and law school years he also served as an intern for State Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley and Congressman Jim Slattery (also the Democrat nominee for U.S. Senate against Pat Roberts in 2008).
Paul Davis made major strides when he was
endorsed by more than 100 Republican office holders, both current and former. That number of Republican endorsements has now reached
over 500 politicians and educators. His criticisms of Governor Brownback's policy have resonated with Kansas voters, most indicative by the majority of polling showing he has had a consistent 4 to 5 point lead over the governor. The Republican machine has tried various avenues of attack on his candidacy, by either labeling him as the "liberal lawyer from Lawrence" (Lawrence being seen by conservatives in the state as liberal as Kansas, which everyone knows is quite laughable), the "Obama Democrat", and the "tax and spend liberal." Nothing has managed to stick however, which has caused the Brownback led Republican machine to dig up dirt on the challenger. After the Coffeyville Journal broke the story that Davis was at a strip club (owned by his firm's client), with his boss during a meth raid, it was discovered that a public employee, while on the clock, requested those records from Montgomery County. As a result, the personal attacks that have stemmed from that "dirt digging" have actually caused public backlash and have been received as mostly an attempt to smear the incumbent's challenger in order to avoid the discussion over the public's discontent with his policy initiatives.
Even though the polls have consistently shown Davis with a lead, however as of late some polls are showing Brownback in the lead. Nate Silver has said he hasn't been taking the last several polls in Kansas very seriously because they seem to have a Republican bias that is not truly representative of the state's demographics nor at all consistent with any data (numbers virtually flipping without showing any trend before hand seems more like an outlier than a true sample). Republicans have been publically proclaiming momentum, yet internal polls from both parties are causing pause for any expectations of a Republican sweep. They're actually so worrisome that now U.S. Congressional leadership is now pleading congressional Republicans to financially support Jenkins, for fear of a down ticket strike against the Republicans in Kansas. Read that again! National Republicans, after looking at internal polling data, are freaking out because they fear Jenkins will be voted out of office BECAUSE of the polling for the races above her (that includes Brownback, Roberts, and Kobach). We've heard word that either Huelskamp or Yoder are worried about the same affect (however, we can't confirm, but we will say that the tipster made it sound like it's someone that shouldn't normally be worried at all which would point to Huelskamp, because Yoder should always expect a competitive race). Regardless, neither candidate has been able to break the 50 point threshold, which really makes the race a toss up, between the two.....
or does it? How about?
(L) Keen Umbehr - There probably hasn't been a more interesting candidate for Kansas governor than this year in Keen Umbehr. Not because he's a flamboyant character with radical political views, but because he may embody Kansas Values and the American Dream better than any before him. Like his opponents, Keen graduated from law school. Like Brownback, he obtained his undergraduate degree from Kansas State University and like Davis, he earned his law degree from Washburn. However, unlike Brownback and Davis, Keen did it all in his 40's; after he won an appeals court decision on the First Amendment right of 'Freedom of Speech'; after he was a successful business man that collected trash; and after his son graduated from high school.
The obscure candidate (not by his choice mind you, but by the media and his challengers) from the an obscure Kansas town (Alma), that looks kind of like a young Bill Murray is actually the only candidate in the race that has a legitimate issues page on his website. (If you'd like to see it, check it out
here.) And sense Umbehr is the only candidate that has a legitimate issues page, we'll let his issues dictate the match up on the issues he addresses. But, we are going to arbitrarily assign point values to issues and then maybe even ignore how they add up in the end (so don't focus too much on that).
MEDIA NOTE: But seriously media, you've a ton a terrible job covering his candidacy. So what he may not have the name recognition or sell the papers, but you have a duty as journalists, too expose the public to all candidates. Don't regulate the political process, we just want you to be informative and honest. For instance, if someone is blatantly lying, tell us. If I have three options, don't write as if I only have two. Most of you take the position that there is too much money in politics, but you don't give anyone without money exposure to the electorate. You're not doing your job and that's why we have resorted to social media.
ISSUES:
1. Can Keen Umbehr Wing? Well of course he can. A candidate only needs a plurality of votes, not a majority. In a three way race 34% could be all that's needed to win. As Umbehr's website points out that 32% of Kansans don't identify themselves as Republican or Democrat, if a third party candidate were to syphon that group and grab one percent from each of the other the candidate would get that 34% number. Is it realistic? Probably not, but the media fulfilling the desire of the two parties to only promote the two parties is a big factor.
CONCLUSION: We are calling on all Kansans to pay more attention to local and state races than they do to federal races. We have a tendency to only focus on what's going on in the White House, the Speaker of House's and Senate Majority Leader's offices. This allows for greater corruption from the governments that impact your life more directly. If you pay attention to your local races within their local contexts, candidates like Keen Umbehr that actually outline policy decisions will receive the focus and recognition they deserve. He's just as intelligent than his Republican and Democratic counterparts. He has just as much education and even has more life experience.
On paper, I'd be more inclined to believe a candidate that lives in Alma, KS is probably more in line with the values of common Kansans than a candidate that has only lived in the Topeka - Lawrence areas of the state, which in itself is even better than the candidate that has spent 28 years in government, spending most of that time in Washington, D.C. who also clearly has been planning his road to the Presidency before he even ran for governor.
2. How are the candidates defined politically? Sam Brownback champions being a "conservative", he claims Davis is a "liberal", but Davis identifies as a "moderate" (if he identifies at all), and Umbehr claims to be a "conservative libertarian". Umbehr goes on to claim that since he is an attorney he is a "strict constitutionalist". However, the other candidates are attorneys as well, all learning and mastering the same legal philosophies in law school.
Umbehr then states that a "strict constitutionalist" is some one who believes and understands the "the words used at the time our Constitution was written controls my interpretation of the document". Really, that means he is a constitutional "originalist" (yet, even this a very broad statement; look at the U.S. Supreme Court case
District of Columbia v. Heller and note how the majority opinion written by originalist, Justice Scalia, is contrasted with the dissenting opinion of originalist, Justice Stevens). However, that prefaces his next claim which is that the Constitution is not a living document subject to reinterpration and that he holds "the Constitution supreme above party ideology and political expediency." That's fair. It's a political belief, which sums up his final statement that he believes "our state and federal constitutions limit the government, not the people." That as well is a pretty accurate statement. However, it doesn't quite address that the purpose of government is to efficiently regulate society, but it does acknowledge the respective constitutions limit the governments in the means and ends of what that regulation can be.
Sam Brownback is a "conservative". Which really is not the appropriate term to describe the kind of political ideology or philosophies Brownback prefers. It would be more accurate to claim that Brownback is "right-wing" (and we'll explain those distinctions in later posts, but in essence "conservative" means traditionalist in a policy sense and it means to conserve in a personal sense). If Sam Brownback were truly a Kansas "conservative" in its correct political terminology, Brownback would actually be more of a centrist. However, he is not. He's anti-abortion and anti-same sex marriage, which would qualify as positions of a Kansas "conservative", but his economic and education philosophies are not consistent with positions that qualify as a Kansas "conservative", but instead are right-wing (even though that term is flawed as well, but since we haven't at all introduced the idea of "political-fusionism" we will let the right-wing term stand for now: for fun click on
this for the absurdity of the left-right classification.). Ultimately, it's clear that Sam Brownback believes that inequality is inevitable and not only do his policies allow for this inequality to be achieved it actually promotes inequality as if it is desired.
Paul Davis seems to be the "moderate", with evidence of his 500+ officials of the GOP endorsing him. Obviously, when compared to Sam Brownback, Paul Davis would be to the left, but that doesn't inherently make him "left-wing" or even what we more inadequately describe as "liberal" or "progressive". A "liberal" is one that believes in freedom, independence, and self-determination. You already see the flaw in that description, because it is exactly what "conservatives" claim to be. Paul Davis's view seem to be more equality based. To be put a better way, Davis's views seem to promote the idea that the opportunity for equality should always be present or at the very least encouraged. Looking at his candidacy as a whole, (we're unaware of his view on same-sex marriage) but his views on economic and social policies seem to be much closer the moderate tradition which is prevalent in Kansas's history. So more correctly, Paul Davis is the closest thing in this race to the actual Kansas political-conservative. (We're cutting it off here, because if we dissect them to far on this point, there will be no need to review the other issues Keen Umbehr identifies.)
CONCLUSION: Keen Umbehr clearly identifies who he is and is line with that self identification (3 points for consistency, -1 for ideology). Sam Brownback plays the "liberal-conservative" game which is actually the "left-right" game and it doesn't help identify what he truly is in terms of a label, but since he uses the label we have to ding him for (-2 points for him). Davis isn't a label based candidate, but since he's working a race that was shaped that way before it even started, Davis has taken the "moderate" approach. It's a label that isn't a label. We really aren't even sure what a moderate is, but its clear that he's more in line with Umbehr taking a positions approach rather than a label approach which is something we like (2 points for taking a positions approach, 2 points for not defining himself as a label, -1 point for still pandering to the labeling game).
3. Tax Plan: Umbehr probably sums up the charge that Brownback promotes inequality as if it desired best with his critique of Brownback's tax plan.
Umbehr accurately points out that the governor has shifted the burden onto W-2 wage earners to pay 100% of the state's income tax (allowing 191,000 businesses to pay zero income tax). Umbher's solution is to implement the Fair Tax. The Fair Tax is a "consumption tax" of 5.7% on goods and services and repeals all state income and sales tax. Tax philosophers generally consider three principles when considering the appropriateness of a tax: (1) equity, (2) neutrality, and (3) efficiency.
The consumption tax is facially economically neutral (all who consume get taxed the same rate) and it administratively efficient (it's easy to figure out, it's a flat tax of 5.7% on all consumption), but it lacks equity (horizontal-equity being that all who have the same ability to pay taxes should pay the same and vertical-equity being that those who have the ability to pay more taxes pay more than those who have a lesser ability). It is nondiscriminatory facially speaking, but its arguable that it still shift the tax burden on the lesser earners as a whole (they pay a higher percentage of their income and wealth in taxes, because they have less ability to save money, which wouldn't be taxed in a consumption tax system). But it also doesn't claim to be an equitable tax system. In fact its proponents would probably argue that an equity system (horizontal and vertical equity) is discriminatory. Yet, as we pointed out above, the proponents of an equity system would argue that the consumption system is discriminatory. We would encourage Umbehr to address this conflict and convince us why consumption is less discriminatory than equity.
Brownback's plan is much of the same, pointed out by his Roadmap 2.0. In fact, the income taxes are scheduled to keep falling. (We're not taking that as an issues page, because it's really just a generalization of an outline without substance. Also, his site's pages, 'Record' and 'Reality Check', are really just conveniently sliced statistics that lack substance and have been widely refuted and debunked. His apologists say that's just the liberal media bias, but we're so tired of that argument, especially when his allies quote the Cato Institute and the Heritage Foundation as evidence of his policies working. They're not biased at all [
with the most sarcastic tone one can muster]). We see where this tax philosophy has us; revenue shortages, Kansas's credit-rating downgrades, and more state debt the taxpayer will have pay in the future.
Davis's plan seems to be more pragmatic. He first is calling a freeze to income taxes to keep the revenue shortages and state debt from continuing to rise. Davis has stated that before we consider rolling back the taxes we first have to stop the bleeding (adequately fund education to pre-recession era levels when you take inflation into account).
CONCLUSION: Umbehr has a consistent and well thought out plan, he acknowledges that the current tax policy is discriminatory in its nature. However, consumption tax worries us. Why? Mexico. We'd still like further explanation on why consumption is better than equity, but at least he engages in the issue (2 points for pointing out Brownback's tax flaw, 1 point for proposing a viable alternative, and perhaps a +/- 1 point on whether he can show consumption is better than equity).
Brownback's plan is literally underfunding the government and it seems it will continue to do so, unless the economy picks up. He still hasn't convincingly shown how that will work (-3 points for Kansas's credit rating downgrades).
Davis is engaging the issue at a traditionally "conservative" approach where caution is emphasized and solutions will be framed to address the problem as is. It's an interesting approach for a Democrat to take. It certainly isn't a left-wing approach. And it's refreshing that a candidate isn't succumbing to the 24-hour media force of "we want to know everything, we want it simply, and we want it now". He's going to act with caution and access (2 points for pragmatism, 2 points for acknowledging the problems of Brownback's tax, -1 for not enough emphasis).
4. K-12 Education: Umbehr applauds the tradition of Kansas's education system. He wants it properly funded (without being explicitly clear on what that means, unless you scroll down his policy page where he talks about current funding) and is opposed to Common Core.
Brownback is all over the board on the issue. He fights against its funding, then champions his shoring up of the KPERS (not exclusive to teachers, but also other public employees) system. Next he strips teachers of their due process and then he advocates for all day kindergarten, which he effectively rejects helpful funding.
Davis claims education funding is his number 1 priority. He wants it restored to pre-recession levels (which is slightly more explicit than Umbehr's stance on funding). Davis proudly acknowledges Kansas's historical placement of value on education. He says that education is vital to a strong economy. These are true, but there isn't very much analysis. Davis is listening to teachers, principals, superintendents, and school board members and his position is that Kansas needs to provide these educators with resources they need to improve the quality of education. Paul Davis hasn't addressed Common Core, but it might be for the reason that the majority of those in the education field (school board members, superintendents, principals, and teachers) support the system (for what that's worth). However, that's pure unsubstantiated speculation.
CONCLUSION: Umbehr gets it that Kansas has a great historical record on education, he also supports it's proper funding (1 point for Kansas tradition).
Governor Brownback's record is too inconsistent (-4 points for being insufferable on the issue).
Paul Davis clearly values education, but doesn't get down to the nitty gritty (2 points for understanding education and the economy, 1 point for Kansas tradition, 1 point for funding, -1 point for not being too clear).
5. Job Creation: Keen Umbehr believes that government in general does not and can not create public sector jobs. It can encourage growth by repealing harmful legislation such as PEAK and IMPAC and also implementing his tax policy.
Sam Brownback believes we need to continue to cut more taxes in line with the current structure he passed into law.
Paul Davis believes that education and halting Brownback's tax policy are the essential first steps.
CONCLUSION: Umbehr (1 point for identifying economically harmful legislation and 1 point for identifying tax policy as a driver. But -1 pointon government not being able to create private sector jobs we immediately wonder how the Golden Gate Bridge, the Hoover Dam, or I-70 was built).
Brownback (0 points. The purpose of his policies is to show that conservative utopian society works, the jury is still out, it's really not looking good, but its not over yet).
Davis (1 point for education, 1 point for tax policy acknowledgment, -1 point for clarity).
6. Kansas Economy: Umbehr says, "The sun is not shining on the Kansas economy, nor is the doomsday scenario an accurate assessment." He then talks about education funding cuts and sees the problem. Brownback is still for more of the same and Paul Davis's position is the same on job creation as well.
CONCLUSION: Since this is really an auxiliary position to the job creation issue and Umbehr further acknowledges education he gets the only point, because the other two candidates' answers don't necessarily change.
7. Abortion: Umbehr first points out that he is 100% pro-life. This is probably where his "conservative" title that prefaces his "libertarian" foundation comes in. The typical Libertarian approach is that the government should not regulate personal decisions, but he takes a principled stand and makes a moral argument. Furthermore, Umbehr relies on his constitutionalist grounds as well. He acknowledges that the state of Kansas has restricted abortion to the fullest extent allowed by Roe v. Wade and he further goes on to state he doesn't support any public funding for abortion.
Sam Brownback is pro-life as well, although its uncertain as to whether or not he believes anti-abortion laws in Kansas have been maxed out. Regardless, there isn't any real concrete distinction between himself and Umbehr on the matter.
Paul Davis is more similar to his two opponents than he is different. He is opposed to any abortion beyond the first trimester (with exception to the mother's life). Beyond that it's somewhat unclear, but since this race has been about the overall direction Kansas is headed economically and educationally this issue seems to have not gained any traction.
CONCLUSION: We really can't see where any candidate could further restrict abortion access or get the legislature to loose the restrictions on abortion either. Davis's view seems to fit the Constitutional analysis provided by Roe v. Wade and the other two candidates are restrained from passing any more restriction on the issue. The reality is that Governor of Kansas does not hold any position to amend the Constitution of the United States. State legislators do, through the means of a constitutional amendment convention of the states, but governors are not included in that approach.
8. Same-Sex Marriage: Umbehr doesn't explicitly state his view on the subject, but he effectively concedes that although Kansas has a constitutional ban on the institution, states' constitutional bans within our federal court district that a similar law have been found to be unconstitutional and it's only a question of time when Kansas's ban gets overturned as well.
Brownback will fight same-sex marriage and Paul Davis wants to focus on other issues.
CONCLUSION: Umbehr gets 2 points for taking a stance. Brownback loses 3 points for fighting another mute issue and Davis gets no points for letting the issue work itself out (
this San Francisco article says it all) in court (which any attorney would be willing to bet everything they could that constitutional ban will be overturned).
9. Marijuana: Umbehr supports medical usage, Brownback opposes all use, and Davis hasn't clarified (but this seems like silly issue in this race, because no one is advocating for the Colorado law). No points given.
10. State Spending Cuts & Social Programs: Umbehr wants to pay off the bonds which will require spending to be cut if there isn't a surplus. He also wants to keep education at the current level of funding (I think we found our education answer), provide adequate funding for the poor and vulnerable, and fund judiciary and corrections departments. Brownback is willing to cut funding to education, or at least he fought for it when the issue came before the Kansas Supreme Court. Brownback's government is also using the Kansas State Department of Transportation as a slush fund to make up for the revenue shortfalls. Not to mention his cuts to other social safety net institutions that and legal services that are causing outcry. Davis wants to immediately freeze that Brownback tax and then go from there. This may require spending cuts but they won't come from education.
CONCLUSION: Umbehr 3 points for being clear and moral. Brownback - 3 points for being a true believer that is willing to sacrifice the most economically beneficial area for the purposes of paying for his tax cuts. Davis 1 point for not letting education be apart of the chopping block, 1 point for education funding exceeding current levels, 1 point for being pragmatic but -1 for less clarity than Umbehr.
11. Voter ID: Both Umbehr and Davis condemn the voter registration law and see it as a disenfranchisement of the right to vote. Brownback signed it.
CONLCUSION: 10 points for Davis and Umbehr. -10 points for Brownback.
The other issues seem to be inconsequential from here.
OUR PICK:
Clearly this is a two candidate race. The candidate race really comes down to (D) Paul Davis vs. (L) Keen Umbehr. Sadly, the media and the current unfair advantage the Republican and Democrat system employ does not provide voters with enough information on who the third party candidates are, and specifically in this race, the Libertarian Keen Umbehr. Even exacerbating the problem is that the incumbent Republican is the one with all the money and the built in advantage. This puts us in a place where we don't want to be. Governor Brownback will most assuredly receive 45% or more of the vote on the Kansas virtue of being a Republican and not enough people being informed. What's worse is that it's not even as if he's a good Republican (like Schmidt, Jenkins, or Yoder) he's the worst breed, probably only outdone in terms of awfulness by Secretary of State Kris Kobach.
Even so, we still lean with Davis. Not just because he has a realistically greater opportunity to beat Brownback, but we like his pragmatic approach (although it gets kind of frustrating when you're trying to do your homework and he doesn't offer you solid bullet points; pragmatism certainly has flaws as well). On the flip side, regardless of who wins this race, we'd really like to see Umbehr run for governor again (if not another office). Umbehr and Clemmons have shown a side of Libertarianism that truly connects with people and we want to hear that voice get quite a bit louder.
