Colorado’ senior United States senator, Democrat Mark Udall, is being challenged this year by U.S. Rep. Cory Gardner, R-Yuma. It is a tight race, made even more competitive by the national climate. In actually looking at the candidates, however, the choice is clear. Udall should be re-elected. Gardner may accurately reflect the thinking of his party, or at least of its big donors and activist base, but Udall far better represents Colorado as a whole.
Udall has been relentlessly beating up his opponent over Gardner’s support for “personhood” legislation – similar to Amendment 67 – which would give 14th Amendment rights to each “preborn human person” and in the process ban all abortions and some forms of birth control. Udall’s attacks are becoming repetitive, but the offensive is understandable. Gardner gave him the stick.
The congressman has backed away from Amendment 67 and previous state personhood efforts and has been trying to deny his support for a similar federal push. But he remains a sponsor of the federal Life Begins at Conception Act and his insistence that “there is no federal personhood bill” earned him FactCheck.org’s “Whopper of the Week” award.
Gardner’s dogged support for personhood says one of two things about him. Either his position on women’s rights is far out of the Colorado mainstream or the congressman will say anything for a vote.
Gardner’s appeal is his youthful exuberance – he turned 40 in August – and what Newsweek called “his likeable personality, which helps insulate him from his conservative record in Congress and in the Colorado Legislature before that.” The fact is, though, people espouse extreme ideas, such as “personhood,” either because they are ideologically committed or because they are deeply cynical. Colorado needs neither.
What this state does need, and historically has produced, is consistent, middle-of-the-road representation from people unafraid of reaching across the aisle when common ground can be found. Udall has done that. While his overall voting record certainly reflects his Democratic affiliation, he has broken with his party when he felt the issue important to his constituents.
Examples include his support for money to improve safety at public shooting ranges, an amendment to allow guns in national parks and a bill to make concealed-carry permits reciprocal between states with similar laws. He also supported “responsible and environmentally sensitive offshore oil drilling.”
Udall worked to cut excise taxes paid by Colorado’s burgeoning brewing industry. And he introduced a bill to extend the lending authority of credit unions to help small businesses.
From his seat on the Armed Services Committee, he has largely supported the administration’s policies in Iraq and Afghanistan. He has pushed back, however, on government surveillance. As a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee he tried to get the Justice Department to report how many Americans have had phone calls and emails monitored.
In response to news that the Central Intelligence Agency had been spying on the Senate, Udall called for CIA Director John Brennan to resign. “This grave misconduct,” he said, “not only is illegal, but it violates the U.S. Constitution’s requirement of separation of powers.”
While Udall is justified in battering Gardner over his position on personhood and his plan to sell birth control pills over the counter (Congress does not decide such things), there is more to talk about than reproductive rights.
In response, however, Gardner offers little beyond reflexive opposition to government in general and Obamacare in particular.
Vote to re-elect Mark Udall.
