The Club for Growth has decided to back Steve Laffey in his bid to unseat RINO Senator Lincoln Chafee. The Wall Street Journal wrote an opinion piece questioning Laffey’s commitment to smaller government
given that while mayor of Cranston, RI he raised taxes and said that they may have to be raised again in 2007.

Yesterday I said that Club for Growth president Pat Toomey had some explaining to do and today he did just that. I participated in a conference call with bloggers that Pat Toomey hosted, which lasted just under 30 minutes. Not having a voice recorder I had to type fast, but I believe I’ve accurately recorded some of the highlights below. [I'm using block quotes to indicate what Pat said, but almost everything is paraphrased — I'm not that good of a typist.]

The Club for Growth thinks that the blogging community can have an impressive impact on the political process.

The Laffey/Chafee contest will be the highest profile Republican race this cycle and will be a defining race for the Republican party. The party is in grave danger of losing its commitment to smaller government. The core issue is “what does the Republican party stand for, if anything.”

Lincoln Chafee is the most liberal Republican in the Senate. He cites concerns about the deficit but consistently votes for and cosponsors legislation that massively increases spending. He is tied to unions, is against education reform and is “bad on pro-growth and economic freedom issues.”

Steve Laffey, on the other hand, has signed the Americans for Tax Reform pledge. He not only supports the Bush tax cuts but supports making them permanent, including elimination of the Death Tax. He is for free trade and school choice.

Moreover, he shows a willingness to rock the boat and will shake up the establishment in Washington. Pat can see him standing on the senate floor with Tom Coburn to block wasteful spending.

Pat wrapped up his presentation by saying that in his senate race in 2005 bloggers played a key role in energizing the base across the country, raising consciousness and helping to raise funds.

Leon Wolf (from RedState, I assume?) questioned the wisdom of putting up a strong challenger in a liberal state like Rhode Island. “Can Laffey win in Rhode Island and won’t a Democrat be infinitely worse?”

Pat responded that the Club is absolutely convinced that Steve Laffey can win. They have done extensive polling and it must be remembered that Laffey won the mayor’s race in a city in which only 14% of the voters are registered as Republican.

In addition, they believe that Chafee will lose in the next general election, partly because of the NRSC’s attack ads on Laffey. Polling indicates that the negative campaigning on the part of the national Republican party against another Republican has backfired by making Republican voters less likely to support Chafee.

Another blogger (I didn’t catch the name) noted that if we lose, we will have a Democrat that votes the way that Chafee does and lose the times that Chafee votes with the caucus.

Pat responded that Chafee does not always vote with his party and, considering Chafee’s positions, the damage will be minimal. Moreover, taking down Chafee would send a vital message to the rest of the Republicans and will have a positive impact on the party and the voting as a whole.

Another asked Pat to respond to the Opinion Journal piece which said that Laffey had increased taxes.

Pat said that the Club didn’t cut candidates any slack in this area and had taken a close look at Laffey’s tax increases. They came to the conclusion that Laffey had come into office within weeks of city defaulting on its debts. The city couldn’t borrow any more money because it basically had no credit. The only other option was to go into receivership and allow the state to take over management of the city’s finances, at which time taxes would have been increased anyway. By stepping in, Laffey was able to prevent the city from going bankrupt, exposed union corruption and got spending under control.

Pat also noted that when Chafee was mayor, he raised taxes without his city being under threat of bankruptcy.

Pat concluded by urging supporters and bloggers to take a swing at the NRSC so that maybe they’ll spend time bashing Democrats instead of Republicans. He said that Club for Growth membership is free and members can donate to Steve Laffey through the Club. He also noted that only a candidate and a PAC has full First Amendment rights during a political race.

Overall, I’d say that Pat did a pretty good job.

On the subject of raising taxes, Laffey’s campaign site echoes what Pat said:

When he stepped into office in January, 2003 the City had the lowest bond rating in the country and was near bankruptcy. The City was borrowing at 8.25% , triple tax free for 3 month notes (a tax equivalent rate of 15%). The Market has taken note of Mayor Laffey’s actions to restore financial stability to the City, and in less than 6 months from the Mayor’s taking office, the rates were reduced to less than 1% – an 85% decrease saving taxpayers $1 million in borrowing costs. Even more notable was the bond rating which went from the lowest in America in January of 2003 back to investment grade in less than two years!

In the two and one-half years since taking office, Mayor Laffey has led Cranston forward by leaps and bounds. He had his proposed 2003/2004and 2005/2006 budgets approved unanimously and his 2004/2005 budget approved 8-1 by the City Council. Furthermore, he trimmed the City costs by several million dollars and was able to propose a tax freeze for the 05/06 fiscal year.

On the subject of campaign contributions to Democrats (the other of the concerns raised by the Opinion Journal column), my research indicates that this was minimal. A token $200 contribution to Jesse Jackson (link) could easily be explained as a business decision, as Laffey was president of the half-billion dollar financial services firm Morgan Keegan which is headquartered in the majority black city of Memphis. The 1994 $250 contribution to a Democrat senatorial candidate could be explained in much the same way

In 1995, Laffey gave $1,000 to presidential candidate Lamar Alexander and added another $500 in 1999 (link). In 2001, he gave another $1,000 to the Rhode Island Republican Party and supported president Bush in 2004 with yet another $1,000 (link). Heck, he even supported Chafee in 2002 with a $200 contribution.

In my lifetime I’ve seen how good organizations go bad after a period of time. Examples include unions, AARP and, to some extent, the NRA. So I am naturally suspicious of organizations like the Club for Growth.

However, after listening to Pat Toomey and taking a quick poke around the internet, I remain a staunch supporter of the Club for Growth. I believe that they remain true to their mission and will join in their support of Steve Laffey. And I’ll ask that you do the same.

More at Ankle Biting Pundits.

HT to Lawyer Ken for sending me the original Opinion Journal article yesterday.

Update: RightWing Nation was also on the call and tells us why it is important to support Laffey:

It would send a strong, clear message to the national party, that we are sick of big government Republicans who are nearly indistinguishable from Democrats. No GOP challenger has beaten a GOP incumbent in a primary for twenty-five years, so even a strong showing in the primary would be a wake-up call to the Washington establishment.

Damn fine reasoning.

Update 2: Leon at RedState finally gets his post up. It’s a thoughtful piece that disagrees with the Club. I disagree with Leon and will support the Club in this matter, but Leon’s reasoning deserves a careful read.