Monday Morning Politicking with Bob Schaffer

SchafferFormer CD-4 Congressman, 2004 U.S. Senate candidate, and current State Board of Education Vice-Chairman Bob Schaffer is the presumptive Republican nominee in this year's U.S. Senate race in Colorado -- one of the most-watched Senate races in the nation. Most polls have shown only a razor-thin margin between Schaffer and likely Democratic nominee Mark Udall in their race for the seat being vacated by U.S. Sen. Wayne Allard (R-Loveland).

This week's Monday Morning Politicking is a wide-ranging, sometimes contentious, conversation with Schaffer. He discussed recent reports regarding his 1999 trip to the Northern Marianas Islands and offered a response to allegations he received thousands of dollars from groups and PACs "directed and influenced" by Jack Abramoff. He also suggested the as-yet-unexplored issue he feels will play a major role in the campaign.

PolitickerCO.com interviewed Schaffer in Westminster last Tuesday. Schaffer was accompanied by his campaign manager, Dick Wadhams, who jumped into the conversation at several points.

PolitickerCO: The campaign's been fairly quiet about the whole Marianas Islands controversy since it came out in the Post about a week or so ago. What's your take on this whole controversy and how it's played out?

Schaffer: Why don't you describe the controversy?

PolitickerCO: Well, just that the Post put out a series of articles detailing how, one, you went to the Marianas Islands and it was funded by or organized by Preston Gates...

Schaffer: Really? Was it?

Wadhams: No.

(Editor's Note: Schaffer's trip, according to the Denver Post, was not paid for by Preston Gates, jailed lobbyist Jack Abramoff's former law firm. According to the Post, it was paid for by the California-based Traditional Values Coalition, which Schaffer described as a religious group "concerned with human rights." The Post also reported that "Later investigations have shown that in many instances, TVC - which claims to represent 43,000 churches - acted virtually as a political arm of Abramoff's lobbying operation.")

Schaffer: Why don't you take the opportunity to substantiate your comment just now?

PolitickerCO: Sure, sure. This is just -well, what is your take on the controversy? Why don't you fill me in?

Schaffer: Why don't you describe the controversy?

PolitickerCO: The controversy?

Schaffer: Yeah.

PolitickerCO: Well, just what's been in the papers, and there's a whole series of things - and I'm not asking you so much to talk about the controversy itself, but how's it's played out and what the reaction's been in the media and -- that's what I'm going for.

Schaffer: Well, the Denver Post has a hard time arriving at a factual and truthful representation of a 1998 event (Editor's Note: Schaffer visited the Marianas in August of 1999). And that probably causes controversy for the Denver Post. Maybe you should take it up with them.

PolitickerCO: Just trying to get your take on it. Just trying to get your take on it.

Schaffer: I'm not sure what "it" is. I'm asking you to describe that.

PolitickerCO: The controversy-the reaction to the Denver Post articles. That's what I mean by "it." And what you see as the effect--

Schaffer: Jeremy, if you're going to ask me-anyway, now listen, I love questions. I love talking about campaigns. If you've got something you want me to answer, you've got to tell me what you want me to answer.

PolitickerCO: I'm trying to tell you right now. I'm asking what your take is on the reaction and the effect of the Denver Post articles on this topic- that's my question.

Schaffer: I think it's probably hurt the credibility of the Denver Post.

PolitickerCO: Why?

Schaffer: Well, because when any news organization fails to report accurately and completely on any topic, readers tend to, um, assign lower and lower levels of credibility to reporters that make no pretense for objectivity - a political reporter, any kind of reporter.

PolitickerCO: What specifically - when you say inaccurate, what do you mean?

Schaffer: Things that they stated that were not true.

PolitickerCO: Like what?

Schaffer: You can, uh...Well, there were several. But frankly, I'm not here to talk about the Denver Post. If that's an interest to you-I mean, it's nice that you ask about the Denver Post, and I've made some comments, but you probably ought to talk to the Denver Post about their stories, their reporting, their controversies. I'm just not hired by them to do that.

PolitickerCO: Sure. There's been a story in the - (Lynn)Bartels wrote one, and there was one in the Post too about (American Right To Life Action head and former Colorado GOP Chair) Steve Curtis questioning your pro-life credentials because he claims you ignored forced abortions-

Schaffer: What example did he give?

PolitickerCO: What example did he give?

Schaffer: What example did he give? Yeah.

PolitickerCO: He offered the testimony of that woman whose name escapes me, who claimed that her husband went undercover - he's a Filipino-American - and she claimed that he went undercover and after that-

Wadhams: Curtis did not make that claim, Jeremy. You've got it all mixed up.

(Editor's Note: Curtis did not cite the woman, Wendy Doromal, in either the Post or the Rocky story. Doromal's allegations were reported concurrently along with Curtis' attacks in the Rocky Mountain News article.)

PolitickerCO: But...no. He pointed to that. He definitely did point to that.

Schaffer: I don't think so.

Wadhams: No, you're mixing up Curtis with that left-wing activist who-

PolitickerCO: But Curtis pointed to a left-wing activist who-

Schaffer: Curtis' story was about a Chinese woman.

(Editor's Note: The Post article states, "According to Colorado Right to Life officials, Shiu Yon Zhou, a member of the group, was forced to undergo a forced abortion in China and later sought refuge in the U.S., where she eventually became a citizen." American Right To Life Action is an offshoot of Colorado Right To Life).

PolitickerCO: He made several claims.

(According to the Rocky article, American Right To Life Action wanted to know if Schaffer would reconsider his congressional vote giving favored-nation trading status to China "given reports of forced abortions in China and involving Chinese workers in the Marianas.")

PolitickerCO: He also said that you had not weighed in on the personhood referendum, proposed referendum-

Schaffer: Yeah, let's not get beyond these basic questions. What was the example he gave?

PolitickerCO: I'm sorry? Which example?

Schaffer: You asked me to react to somebody's, maybe Curtis', allegation that I somehow turned my back on human life issues. And I'm asking, what is the example? And you've not answered that.

PolitickerCO: But do you know what he said?

Wadhams: Jeremy, this whole interview stands in stark contrast to that fluff piece you did on Udall. I don't know if we're going to go any further on this. So if you want to continue with this line of questioning, we're going to cut it off right now.

PolitickerCO: All right, I'll move on to the next question.

Wadhams: Very good.

PolitickerCO: Not a problem.

Wadhams: Keep moving.

PolitickerCO: Sure. [Turning to Schaffer] What has been your take on the campaign in general so far? Has it played out the way that you expected it to, or has there been surprises for you?

Schaffer: It's going great. We're meeting all of our expectations. We got an early start on the campaign - it was not as early as the three years of campaigning that Udall's devoted to running for the U.S. Senate, but in the year that we've been involved in the campaign, we've risen our-have increased our, you know, the numbers indicating voter awareness of the campaign. Fundraising is on track; our day-to-day pace is pretty ambitious. And we've met our goals, and in fact exceeded them in some cases. And the campaign's starting out, pretty much, on an even footing. This is a state where Republicans tend to come on stronger towards the end, but for us-and Democrats tend to be favored heavily in the early stages of a race. But this race, Udall and I are statistically dead even, according to a variety of independent polls - including our own. So starting off at the starting line, at the same place, in April of an election year is an advantage no Republican has within the last decade or so.

PolitickerCO: How do you think the president-obviously, the Democrats haven't chosen their nominee yet-but how do you think the presidential race will have an effect (on the Senate race), this, of course, being an election year?

Schaffer: I think it's dramatically to my advantage. The McCain presidency dovetails very nicely with the goals - with the prevailing attitudes, opinions and beliefs of Coloradans. This is a state that is a center-to-conservative electorate, and McCain's credentials there are pretty much identical to mine. So, there's going to be great consistency up and down the ticket, from John McCain to the U.S. Senate race - my candidacy -- as well as campaigns for state legislature, local offices, as well. (This is) versus a very scattered, a very scattered portfolio and non-descript one on the Democrat side, which is far left of center but on a wide variety of issues. Hillary Clinton, for example, should she become the nominee, is one whose track record is decidedly in favor of economically punishing tax policy, regulatory policy, and flip-flopping where national security is concerned. Obama, for example, has proposed the highest tax increase since the Second World War. His preference for Saddam Hussein to still be in power stands in great contradiction to the American heroes who have actually gone over to Iraq to remove him. And so, for a variety of reasons - Well, and when you look at the multiple strategies that both have deployed that have resulted in exorbitant fuel costs - gasoline, home heating oil, and just energy costs in general. This is a state that understands energy independence, energy development, environmental integrity, and the effect that all of this has on the economy. And so there-my point is, is that regardless of who ends up heading the ticket on the Democrat side, their values and beliefs, right along with Mark Udall's, are very far left of center and out of the mainstream of Colorado voters.

PolitickerCO: What issue has not come up in the campaign so far that you expect will be a major factor by November?

Schaffer: Public education. It is the topic that has been largely ignored by Democrats over the years. We live in a state that has one of the largest minority dropout rates in the country, and yet the leadership in the Statehouse -- the U.S. Congress is, well, have been essentially sleepwalking through what is a legitimate crisis. And the differences between Udall and me on education are worlds apart. I have devoted myself to a strong reverence for local control and parental empowerment and real results and accountability and transparency in public education. Udall's approach has been to consolidate decision-making and authority at all-time-high levels in Washington, D.C. with results that are disappointing.

PolitickerCO: And what would you suggest for public education? What's your plan?

Schaffer: Once again, we've got to move authority back to the states and to school board members and to state leaders - not assume that children in Denver, Colorado have the same goals, objectives or learning styles as children in Jersey City, New Jersey or any other city in the country. The further away we get from making decisions - the further away from the school setting we allow the most decisions to be made, the more harm is caused to our schoolchildren.

PolitickerCO: What are your feelings on No Child Left Behind? Do you think it should be altered in any way?

Schaffer: Yeah, it should be radically changed.

PolitickerCO: And how so?

Schaffer: Well, the whole idea of a national curriculum and a national test is a departure from America's traditions of child-centered education.

PolitickerCO: I should ask you - what do you think of the proposed referendum to recognize an embryo as a person? Do you have an opinion on that?

Schaffer: I'm running for the U.S. Senate, and I'm going to keep my focus on the U.S. Senate race. As I understand, these referendums have to do with state laws, and I'm running for the U.S. Senate, which is in Washington.

PolitickerCO: Sure. And what is your take on the Obama/Clinton race. Have you been following it at all?

Schaffer: Mm-hmm.

PolitickerCO: And what do you think about that?

Schaffer: Well, they're very dedicated and passionate liberals. And they're very emblematic of the problems in Washington, D.C. of members of the Congress who are out of touch with the rest of the country and have driven the approval rating of the Congress down to somewhere around 11 percent. And I know they provide exciting choices for those whose viewpoints is distinctly liberal as well.

PolitickerCO: I was at a forum about a month or so ago with - the Independence Institute was there, a gentleman from the Cato Institute - that's more libertarian, but there were more conservative, I guess, media personalities and so. And they were - not to a man, (but) they were a little pessimistic about the Republicans' chances in the Rocky Mountain West and the country as a whole. And I was wondering if you share that pessimism, or what do you think about that?

Schaffer: No, I'm optimistic about Republican chances in the state, in the Rocky Mountain West. When you consider that every branch of government in the state is owned by Democrats - same in Washington D.C; both houses of the Congress are owned by the Democrats; they are the majority party; they are the party in charge - they have driven energy prices up to an all-time high. They have driven up debt -- the national debt is now 9 ½ trillion dollars, which is an unfortunate reality that has been exacerbated by their lack of leadership. They have failed to deliver on the bold promises that they made when they ran for office at the state level and at the federal level. And so when given that they have been entrusted with every branch of government and they have failed to deliver -- voters are looking for real change, not change just for the sake of stating the word, which is a nice one. But I mean change with substance, which means removing failed leaders and replacing them with those of vision -- an optimistic vision for the state and for the nation, for a vision toward economic growth, for a vision toward individual liberty and freedom, and in addition to that is forward-oriented rather than stuck in the past.

And that sets the stage for reform-oriented Republican victories - Republicans that fail to embrace a message of reform probably are going to be regarded as no different than Democrats. But those of us who believe that our government has gotten too big, imposes too much in the way of restrictions on personal liberty, and taxes us too much, we are receiving receptive audiences all across Colorado, and I think it's a winning message. And it's a message Democrats can't come close to. They are the problem that needs to be resolved.

PolitickerCO: Are you going to be involved - not now, but do you plan to be involved with Republican congressional candidates and even on the state level, with Republican state Senate candidates and state House candidates to help them with the down-ticket races? Do you think you'll play a role in that at all?

Schaffer: Yeah, this is a big statewide effort, and Republicans generally are running as a large team, focused on economic growth, focusing on pro-growth tax policy, focusing on individual autonomy and responsibility. That's a very consistent message, and we're all helping each other to convey that.

PolitickerCO: And my last question is, I did want to get your take on this, there have been accusations that, up in the Udall campaign, that you have taken $33,000 from groups and PACs that were "directed and influenced" by Jack Abramoff. And I wanted to get your response to that.

Schaffer: Sure. The Udall campaign is the only campaign that's admitted receiving cash payments from Jack Abramoff.

PolitickerCO: And what about the accusation that they make?

Schaffer: Well, they put out a press release about their receipt of funds from Jack Abramoff for the Udall campaign. I think that's the only press release they've sent out.

PolitickerCO: There have been news articles in which the Udall campaign has made these accusations.

Schaffer: Well, they've only documented receipts that the Udall campaign has received from Abramoff, and I don't think that they've documented anything else on that matter.