Note to the Reader

In my previous post, I printed the letter I sent to Republican leaders in the Second Congressional District announcing my resignation from the State Central Committee. I resigned in order to keep my promise to not endorse candidates in Republican primaries while serving on the SCC.

In the interest of full disclosure to my readers, I want to be very clear that I resigned in order to devote my energies to helping my good friend Christian Fong win the Republican nomination and become the next governor of Iowa. Unlike some other blogs (or even other media), I want you as readers to know that when you read a post here, you are reading a post from a Fong supporter. On the other hand I am not blogging in an official capacity for the Fong campaign. The opinions presented here are as always my own.

Furthermore, as I no longer hold an official leadership position in the party, I may decide that I have freedom to discuss issues that I did not while serving on the SCC.

This blog has gone through an evolution. Initially it was anonymous. After I was elected to the SCC, the tone changed (voluntarily) to reflect the position of leadership I held. Most recently, I am not anonymous but I am no longer in the party leadership either. It will be an interesting ride.

My Resignation from the SCC

Dear Second District Republicans,

Fifteen months ago, I was elected to represent the Second Congressional District on the State Central Committee of the Republican Party of Iowa. During my tenure, I have worked to bring openness to the process of electing a State Party Chairman and for the first time in my memory, the candidates and vote totals were published on blogs and tweeted in real time. As a member of State Organization Committee, I have helped place into motion a plan which will make national delegate selection a part of the normal district conventions and do away with the Friday night meetings before the state convention. I have served as head of the Technology Committee that is working to provide a better online presence for the party and better communicate with grassroots Republicans all across the state. Finally I have supported all of our candidates who have passed the most important litmus test of all – they won their primaries.

When I was elected, I promised that I would neither seek nor accept a paid staff or consultant position with any campaign or issue-based organization. I further promised that while serving on the State Central Committee, I would remain neutral and not make any endorsements in contested Republican primaries. I am excited that we have such an excellent field of Republican candidates for governor.  It has always been my intent to remain neutral in the upcoming gubernatorial primary and give my full support to the winner.

However, last week everything changed. Last Friday my good friend and fellow Eastern Iowan, Christian Fong announced that he intended to run for governor. I ran for State Central Committee because I wanted to make a difference, I wanted not just to elect Republicans but to see those core principles defined in our platform enacted. Christian is a social conservative with excellent business and financial credentials; he is a visionary and a leader in our community; he is a husband, a father and most importantly a man of integrity. He is exactly what Iowa needs. With Christian in the race I now believe that I can make the biggest difference for our state, our district, my community and my family by working as a volunteer to help him win the GOP nomination and beat Chet Culver in 2010.

Earlier today, I sent a letter to RPI Chairman Matt Strawn resigning my position on the State Central Committee effective immediately. By resigning now, I hope that the Second District Executive Committee will be able to act quickly and elect my replacement in time for the September State Central Committee meeting.

It has been an honor to serve.

 

David R. Chung
Former Second District Representative
State Central Committee – Republican Party of Iowa

 

My Run-In with Haley Barbour

This last summer, I had the honor and privilege of representing Iowa on the Republican National Platform Committee. As a delegate from Iowa, I did my best to work with other delegates to try and shape the National Platform so that it reflects the same values that the Iowa Platform does.

The National Platform is not like our State Platform. The process is quite different. In Iowa, we draft a State Platform based on input from county and district level platforms. The National Platform is drafted by the candidate's team — this was the McCain platform. Therefore, I was surprised that the draft platform was so socially conservative, more so than McCain himself. (On the last day of the convention, McCain put out his own platform that reflected his more moderate views.)

During the platform discussion, the McCain camp had their team in the room and they read the various motions before they came to the floor. If someone made a motion that they didn't like, they would be invited back behind a curtain and a full-court press woodshed would be laid on to get them to withdraw the motion. I have to admit that in advocating for the issues in the Iowa Platform — I got taken behind the McCain woodshed a time or two.

On one of those occasions, in debate I had a run-in with Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour. The issue was drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). The draft platform mentioned all sorts of domestic sources of energy except Ethanol and ANWR. (I stood up for Ethanol too!) Led by one of the delegates from Alaska, I joined a spirited discussion of why ANWR was critical to our nations energy security. I challenged delegates to speak up if their state platforms did not explicitly call for drilling in ANWR - none did. <modesty-off>I gave a great speech.</modesty-off> But it was a Quioxtic effort. The McCain people floor managed the committee well and they won the day.

It was during this debate that Gov. Barbour spoke, he did not address the substance of the issue, whether it was a good idea or bad to drill in ANWR, he simply said, in his Southern Good 'ol Boy way: (As closely as I can recall).

John McCain is our candidate and we don't want to poke a stick in his eye.

I did not have a chance to speak to the issue again, but I muttered under my breath that it was John McCain poking a stick in our eyes.

Two weeks ago, I heard Governor Barbour's now infamous speech at the Night of the Rising Stars event in Des Moines. Barbour was charismatic, witty and entertaining. He even made a joke about his predecessor at the RGA, Mark Sanford. Overall I thought it was a great evening — so why does my eye still hurt?

The TEA Party and the Grand Old Party

Today is Independence Day and across Iowa and the nation there will be all sorts of festivities including TEA Parties. I had hoped to attend the Cedar Rapids TEA Party but today is the last day of my son's leave before he and his fellow soldiers of the 82nd Airborne (hooah!) deploy to Afghanistan — today is his day.

I read with interest the article You May Be a Teapublican by Dave Davidson over at The Iowa Republican. In it Davidson tries to tie the TEA Party and the Grand Old Party together, he even has a TEApubliican website. Davidson says:

If you think Haley Barbour who visited recently should go back to Mississippi after a pathetic compromising plea to vote for pro choice Republican candidates just to win ...

If you like Chuck Norris and the presidential pick Chuck Norris endorsed…

If you think having the 10 commandments hanging on the wall of our court buildings may help our judiciary branch catch a clue of what is right and wrong…

If you think it’s something for Bob Vander Plaats to make the front page of the Des Moines Register explaining to Chet Culver how to deliver the leadership Iowa needs…

You May Be A TEAPublican!

I appreciate Davidson's effort to bring the TEA Party movement into the Republican fold. However the TEA Party movement is not about Haley Barbour's Big Tent or support for Mike Huckabee or the Ten Commandments or Bob Vander Plaats proposed executive order on marriage. Many people in the TEA Party movement would find themselves on opposite sides of these issues. The TEA Party movement is about limited government, responsible spending and tax accountability.

These are core Republican issues. They are not the only core issues but as a party, we Republicans should own these issues. The problem is that when we were in the majority, we had a spending problem. Our presidential candidate (and our president) supported the first bailout. When we had Republican majorities in both houses and a Republican president we did a decent job on taxes but we failed the test on limited government and reduced spending.

Like Davidson, I think that the natural political home for the TEA Party movement is the Republican Party. We are the party of limited government. We are the party of responsible spending. We are the party of tax accountability. At least we say we are.

Unfortunately we have strayed from these core beliefs. If we are to win over voters from the TEA Party movement we must be credible and true to our Republican principles. They have a right to be skeptical.

Social Issues and Fiscal Issues

I am a conservative. I am a fiscal conservative. I am a social conservative. I am a constitutional  conservative. I am also a father of eight.

My eight children are politically involved to different degrees. They run the full gamut from moderates to conservative like their father.

We occasionally have some interesting discussions about political topics. When the first bailout happened (under President Bush) one of my children thought it might be a good idea. Fast forward to the present, with more bailouts and takeovers in the financial and automotive industries.Who would have thought that the government would take over GM or AIG. And this same government is planning to take over the healthcare system. My kids all agree on one thing — the government has gotten out of control.

I am tired of people telling me that we social conservatives have to ignore issues like marriage or life in order to create a big tent. Here in Iowa we have a unique opportunity. The fact that homosexuals are getting marriage licenses and being married in Iowa has social conservatives energized. In Clarke County, the battle over eminent domain has constitutional conservatives ready to fight. And the Tea Party movement has shown that fiscal conservatives have had enough.

We Republicans have the answers for all three of these groups. We need to address social, fiscal and constitutional issues. If we do, and if we recognize that the core, the grassroots of this party in Iowa are conservative in all three categories — we can win in 2010.

As a party we do not have to become something we are not — we have to be what we say we are.

An Iowa Story

This is not a Republican Story or a Democrat Story — it is an Iowa story. So with Fathers Day coming up this weekend, I thought I would share this story from CNN.

Feenstra and Jamison

Constitution Daily has had two posts featuring possible GOP candidates for state treasurer. The two are former Sioux County Treasurer and freshman State Senator Randy Feenstra and current Story County Treasurer Dave Jamison.

Both of these guys would be credible candidates for State Treasurer. More importantly either of them would do an excellent job if elected. There is excitement building in Republican ranks about 2010. In a race where we rarely even field a candidate — we have two great prospects!

It would not hurt my feelings at all if on election day Feenstra and Jamison were both on the ballot for State Treasurer and Secretary of State (in no particular order ;-) ).

Now if only one of our Republican lawyers would step up to challenge Tom Miller.

Health Care

I am a fan of Bill Salier. I first met him during his primary campaign in Cedar Rapids at the home of a good Republican friend, Billboard Bob. I liked his message of family values, strong defense and limited, constitutional government. (I am also a big fan of Steve King, so I will not get in the middle of that particular argument ;-) )

This week I have been listening to Bill filling in for Jan Mickelson on 1040 WHO radio. The topic of greatest interest to me has been healthcare and the push by the Obama government to take over the nation's healthcare system. Whether it is a single-payer government solution or a Massachesetts (Romney) style insurance mandate, we conservatives must stand firm against it.

I recently started my own business full-time. As I looked at all of the things I would have to do to make a go of it, I was dismayed that one of the biggest isses I faced was how to provide health insurance for my family. I know that my situation is atypical. Many of my friends who consult as I do get insurance through their wife's employer. My wife is a stay-at-home mom and we have five children at home.

For most of our married life, we have had insurance coverage through my emplyer. Now, Bill was absolutely correct in saying that I payed for this coverage — not my employer. So I should probably say that I purchased insurance through my employer. I have always said that one of the biggest probelms in our system is that we get our health insurance through our employers.

Most small companies, like my previous employer, do not offer choices to their employees. There was no option to shop around, I could take or leave the group plan. Another problem is that since it was covered, I rarely shopped around or even asked the cost of services. So there was no real incentive for me to try and keep our costs down. My company also provided a Section 125 or cafeteria plan. I put pre-tax money into this plan and then could spend it on medical, dental an dvision expenses. The problem with this program is that money in the plan does not roll-over. If you do not spend it in the calandar year — you lose it. This results in a yearly rush to spend Setion 125 money before it is lost permanently. I have found myself at the end of the year, considering spending money not because it was medically necessary but to avoid forfeiting it.

Even the way that most of us look at health insurance is a problem. We expect our insurance to cover every medical expense we incur. Rather than insuring to prevent medical/financial catastrophe — we insure to cover shots, wellcare, minor scraps, yearly exams, etc.

I have complained about this system for years while comfortably covered by my employers comprehensive health insurance and Section 125 plans. Well now, as a small businessman, I am putting my money where my mouth is. I have just recently purchased a high deductable private insurance policy and started a Health Savings Account(HSA).

HSA's are an outgrowth of the trial Medical Savings Account program. HSA's allow taxpayers to set aside pre-tax dollars similar to a Section 125 plan to pay medical exepnses. MSAs must be combined with a high-deductable health insurance policy. Unlike Section 125 monies, HSA monies roll over and do not have to be spent within tha calander year.

Already my wife and I have found ourselves shopping for services. One of the providers we use charges $130 for na office visit. When the company plan paid, we didn't care about the rate. Now that we pay we were considering switching providers until we found out that if we paid cash (check), the rate went down to $50! Some of the extra $80 would have gone to processing the insurance claim and waiting for the receivables.

By taking responsibility for our basic services and insuring against catastrophes, we as a family are managing our healthcare dollars better and recieving excellent services at a lower cost.

Moving the nation towards a mandatory or government insurance scheme is a move in the wrong direction. It takes any incentive to save out of the system and does not empower people to make intelligent informed decisions.

Senator Grassley's Democrat challenger, Bob Krause has said that healthcare will be one of the defining issues in the campaign — I agree. With his postion on the Senate Finance Committe, Senator Grassley will play a crucial role in standing firm on core Republican prinisples like individual liberty and responsibility and opposing Obama's nationalization of healthcare.

Fight the good fight Senator and we'll be right behind you.

Irrelevance

I am a big fan of Craig Robinson's Iowa Republican and Tim Albrecht's The Bean Walker. I read them daily and frequently check for updates throughout the day. Further, the inclusion of Krusty Konservative, Battleground Iowa and Constitution Daily has increased the profile of these excellent blogs. (Or perhaps they have increased the profile of the Iowa Republican)

In many cases, I have found the topics I wanted to post about already covered and my point of view already well expressed. So in a sense this blog has become irrelevant. Now I know there are some of you who will say, "Dave, your blog was already irrelevant."

At about the same time, there has been a decrease in posts on the 'World's Crappiest Blog', Grant Young's Questions, Comments and Insults, the irreverent In Flyover Country and of late even my friend Art Smith's The Conservative Reader. After a hiatus, Ted's The Real Sporer is back but the posting frequency is sporadic.

In the past 8 months I have been laid off twice by two different companies. Rather than sitting around feeling sorry for myself, I did the conservative thing — I did an assessment of my professional skills and decided to go into business for my self. This activity has take a significant amount of my time so it has been difficult to find time to blog.

I hope to increase my posting frequency. I do not consider myself to be in competition with these other sites, most of them are run by friends and I am certainly a fan. But where I believe that I have something unique or different to add to the debate, I will continue to do so.

Tim and Craig, I think both of your sites are an excellent addition to the Iowa Blogosphere — keep up the good work. Grant, Ted, Art, Flyover and others, I appreciate your insights — I hope you continue to contribute.

Memorial Day

Memorial Day. We Americans have much for which to be thankful. On December 8, 1941, my mother was in church on the island of Guam. Guam is on the other side of the International dateline so December 8 was their Pearl Harbor Day. Her family rushed her out of church when the Japanese invasion began. She spent the rest of the war under Japanese occupation, until the men of the 3rd Marine Division and the 77th Infantry Division liberated the island.

I know that I can never repay the debt that I, my family and every American owes to those brave men and all of the brave men and women who have served our country and won the freedom we enjoy. Many gave the ultimate sacrifice in this cause.

But today, on memorial day, I am proud that my two oldest sons have volunteered to serve their country on active duty in the United States Navy and Army.

One of them is preparing for a deployment to Afghanistan as part of Operation Enduring Freedom. Pray for our troops.