Is the presidential caucus quest Rand Paul’s ‘House of Cards’ moment?
By JIM BROOKS
Nelson County Gazette / WBRT Radio
Friday, March 6, 2015, 9 p.m. — One of my favorite TV dramas isn’t a broadcast or cable program, but one created by streaming media giant Netflix.
“House of Cards” is a drama starring Kevin Spacey who plays U.S. Rep. Frank Underwood. In the show, Underwood is a longtime Democrat from South Carolina’s 5th District who serves as House majority whip.
The show’s real focus is on Underwood’s shady and often underhanded manipulation of people and events to achieve his personal goals and advance his political career.
While watching the first episodes of the third season of “House of Cards” recently I was struck by the thought that we have in Kentucky a member of Congress who seeks a little political manipulation of his own.
While I don’t suggest Sen. Rand Paul and Spacey’s Underwood character have the same moral compass (or in Underwood’s case, the lack of one), I think Sen. Paul is asking for the sort of political manipulation that would make Frank Underwood proud.
Sen. Paul has asked the Kentucky Republican Party’s executive committee to switch how it selects a presidential nominee in 2016. Paul wants the GOP to use the caucus system to select a presidential nominee next year rather than the usual primary election system.
In his Feb. 9 letter to the state Republican party, Paul said the move to a caucus would give Kentuckians a chance to be more relevant in what promises to be a wide-open competition for the Republican presidential nomination. But that’s not the only benefit — the move will allow Paul to run as both a candidate for the Republican presidential nomination and a candidate for the U.S. Senate seat he currently holds.
The GOP’s executive committee meets Saturday, March 7 in Bowling Green to consider Paul’s request.
I fully understand why Sen. Paul wants the change. State law prevents him from appearing twice on the primary ballot, and Paul wants to start the election cycle off as a candidate for both U.S. president and U.S. Senate. If approved by the GOP, Kentucky Republicans would select their presidential nominee in March by caucus. Paul would then be clear to appear on the May primary ballot as a candidate for the U.S. Senate nomination.
I also understand the political reality; Paul doesn’t want to be forced to give up his Senate seat in order to push forward in his bid for president. It isn’t an easy road he seeks, and I have to give him props for understanding that reality.
But the fact Sen. Paul wants to change the long-established primary system to accommodate his desire to explore a run for president just doesn’t set well with me, and from what I have heard, it doesn’t set well with others in the Republican party.
Sen. Paul points to the fact that U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan had the same option in 2012 when he ran simultaneously for his congressional seat and as Mitt Romney’s running mate. That’s true, but is it unfair — in the light of existing Kentucky law — to suggest that Sen. Paul simply make a choice which office he wishes to seek? I don’t think so.
If the state Republican party had experienced problems with the primary election system in the past and wanted to try the caucus system, that’s one thing. Sen. Paul’s people say he wants what’s fair. I do too — but I think candidates should play by the rules. To change the rules simply to accommodate a candidate’s desire to maintain a fall-back position doesn’t pass the smell test — but admittedly, I’m not a politician eyeing a run for president.
Perhaps I’m being idealistic. Despite my reservations, I have been — and will continue to be — one of Sen. Paul’s supporters. The state GOP’s decision Saturday one way or the other won’t change that.
If I’m being naive, so be it. I’ll acknowledge that it is possible Frank Underwood’s point of view on rules may have merit in politics in this instance: “Of all the things I hold in high regard, rules are not one of them.”
-30-
