A couple of days before the Thanksgiving holiday, I had the opportunity to sit down with Ted Cruz and get an update on his quest to replace retiring U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison. One thing is for certain, he hasn’t lost a bit of the “fire in the belly” that I’ve seen in him over the course of the past 11 months. I titled my first interview with him “fighting for principles” and there is no doubt that remains true but I picked up something a little deeper this time as he spoke of the need to save the country for the sake of his two young daughters.
Since that first post, the Cruz campaign has continued to sail along, with very few bumps in the road. His appearance on the cover of National Review was not only a highlight for the campaign; it “earned” even more free media exposure, including a slot on Sean Hannity’s Fox News show, whose viewers fall squarely within Cruz’s targeted voters. He continues to dominate the straw polls that are held after the many Senate forums he has participated in. His campaign also points to two Greater Houston Council polls which show his lead widening in the 10 county organization. He’s received a large number of endorsements from current leaders of the Texas Federation of Republican Women. Just a couple of weeks ago he received another huge endorsement from the professional Christian industry, garnering the support of Dr. James Dobson. In short, the Cruz train is steaming full speed ahead.
He pointed out to me that he is the only candidate for Senate in the U.S. that has received the endorsements of Sen. Jim DeMint, Sen. Rand Paul, Sen. Mike Lee, and Sen. Pat Toomey. This is important, he says, because those four are the most conservative Senators in the Senate – if they support him, there is no question that they consider him to be the best candidate to help them move the country back to its foundational principles. He told me that when each of the men interviewed him before giving him their endorsement, their single most important question was this: Could he stand up to the leaders of the Republican Party? Cruz said that each of the men told him that the leadership of their own party had been their biggest hurdle, not Majority Leader Sen. Harry Reid. They wanted to make certain that he knew this and would be willing to look Minority Leader Sen. Mitch McConnell in the eye and tell him no. Cruz said that if he has the opportunity to join them, perhaps with 4 or 5 more solid conservatives after the 2012 election, they will have the ability to push the Senate towards their goals.
I asked him if getting a core group of 10 or so like-minded Senators was more important than having Republicans take control of the Senate and he assured me that in his mind it was far more important. He thinks that the worst thing that can happen is for the Republicans to take control of the Senate by electing politicians like Lt. Gov. Dewhurst or Tom Leppert because they are the types of politicians that want to get along rather than force their will on the body as a whole. He pointed out that the Republicans did control the Senate for a short time under President G.W. Bush and they were unable to accomplish anything because of this mindset. Cruz repeatedly used the phrase “save the country”, almost in a sense of desperation, as in “if we don’t do it now, we will lose the country”. That is the same message that you hear from him at rallies but one-on-one, it seemed far more intense and, well, “real”.
I finally asked a question that stumped him when I asked why he didn’t include Sen. Marco Rubio in his list of the most conservative members of the Senate. After all, he frequently compares his campaign to the 2010 battle between Sen. Rubio and former Florida Gov. Charlie Christ. He didn’t have a ready answer for that one and for once almost looked uncomfortable with a question. He quickly recovered and changed the topic but I’ll always wear that one as a badge of honor! Hey, the guy is one of the best attorneys in the country, don’t deny me my victory!
We talked quite a lot about Sen. Rubio’s victory and how it compares to the race in Texas. You know the case by now: a Republican with high name I.D., tons of money and the backing of the establishment gets upset by a Tea Party candidate backed by Sen. Jim DeMint. Cruz thinks that this same model will win the race in Texas. In his mind, when Elizabeth Ames Jones dropped out, Cruz’s position as the only conservative on the ballot was solidified, having knocked both Roger Williams and Michael Williams out of the race earlier. He calls this a “sub-primary” and references it frequently in interviews. I’ve already laid out his definition of conservative, you can read it here.
As far as funding goes, he acknowledges that he cannot write a check to match Lt. Gov. Dewhurst or Mr. Leppert. But he thinks that if he can raise between $5 and $10 million, he will win the race. He has already raised $2.8 million, so his ideal numbers are certainly within reach, especially if you consider that three groups will be adding to his coffers and spending money in support of him independently of the campaign: Sen. DeMint’s Senate Conservatives Fund, Club for Growth PAC, and Dick Armey’s FreedomWorks. Add to that the “earned” free media and, if Cruz is correct, he will be able to get his message out to the right voters at the right time.
His campaign has been almost flawless in execution. I thought, as did many others, that he had one misstep, that being his attacks on the Council on Foreign Relations, calling them a “pit of snakes” even though his wife was a member and contributed to a report that many see as giving up some portion of U.S. sovereignty. I mentioned here that I thought his campaign had done a good job at getting that issue out of the media. Cruz surprised me with his answer, saying that it wasn’t a misstep and that he stands behind his statements because the CFR is indeed a pit of snakes. And he thought that before his wife had a five year term there, while she was there, and after she was gone.
He considers this a personal attack on his wife, not on his statements about the CFR. He then talked about attacks on his father’s story, saying that the other campaigns have to use personal attacks: they cannot attack him on the issues because no other candidate in the race has his proven record of fighting for conservative issues. While I think the attacks on his retelling of his father’s story are petty, it seems to me that we haven’t heard the last of his CFR comments.
He completely dismisses Tom Leppert’s chances at winning the primary, saying that no one who was endorsed by ACORN, the SEIU, raised taxes, and participated in a Gay Pride parade could ever win a Texas Republican primary. So that left us to discuss Lt. Gov. Dewhurst.
I first asked if he thought that the Ducking Dewhurst gag was working and he immediately said yes. It has garnered him much of that “earned” free media that he is relying upon and he thinks that voters are genuinely upset that Dewhurst is avoiding public debates. I made a joke about “how would you like to debate a guy that is a professional debater in front of the Supreme Court” and his eyes lit up, saying, “Goodness, if he is afraid to debate me, how is he going to stand up to President Obama, Harry Reid, or Mitch McConnell?” Ah, good point. But seriously, if Dewhurst were to participate in all of these forums, the only thing he does is raise every other participant’s name id, right? Cruz says that it doesn’t matter – voters have the right to hear from all of the candidates at the same time. I found it interesting that even though Cruz dismisses Leppert, Leppert said pretty much the same thing about debates with all of the candidates. Personally, I’d like to see a Cruz-Leppert debate in the style of Lincoln-Douglas. Perhaps Evan Smith of the Texas Tribune would arrange that.
I then asked Cruz to tell me why he continues to say that Dewhurst isn’t a conservative and is more interested in getting along than in governing from principle. He quickly named these three:
- In 2005 he proposed to increase taxes via an income tax and a montage of other taxes
- He has stated that businesses didn’t pay their fair share when Texas instituted the margins tax
- He publicly supported the Texas DREAM Act
I’m familiar with each of these so I asked follow-ups. The first one stems from an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal titled “Deep in the Heart of Taxes”. Cruz campaign manager John Drogin Tweeted a link to this and I blindly re-Tweeted it when I saw the fabled WSJ logo. At least I didn’t do like many others and write a blog post accepting it as truth saying that Dewhurst was Satan like a few others did. Turns out that the opinion piece is false and was refuted contemporaneously by Dewhurst and others – I’ve been meaning to write about it but haven’t found the time. If you look at the timing of the op-ed, it was published near the end of the 79th Legislative session to influence policy. Fool me once and all that stuff.
Regarding the second issue, I noted that homeowners had received a fairly substantial property tax reduction and that the margins tax did make certain businesses that had avoided paying taxes pay them. Think Houston Astros. And on the third one, I had to admit that I also supported Gov. Perry’s position so I was probably a liberal too. I’m not sure why Cruz is against the Texas DREAM Act – to me, it is a residence issue, not a citizenship issue.
So then Cruz said let’s talk about three issues from this past legislative session. He named these:
- The Texas House passed a conservative budget. The Dewhurst led Senate proposed spending billions more and use of the Rainy Day Fund. Gov. Perry smacked him down publicly and Dewhurst backpedaled, leaving Senators mad at him.
- Dewhurst led Senate failed to pass a Sanctuary Cities bill during the regular session
- Dewhurst undermined the passage of the TSA anti-pat down bill in the regular session, then waited so long to pass it in the special that the House didn’t have time to vote on it
We discussed them a bit but on each of those issues, he is either correct or close enough to correct that you really can’t argue with him. Lt. Gov. Dewhurst does have the reputation of being a conciliator rather than a hard line ideologue.
Whew. Don’t worry, I’ll wrap this up soon. Hey, this stuff is interesting to me but very hard to write about. If you’re still reading at this point, I need to give you a gold star.
I asked him the same question that I asked Tom Leppert. If you had to pick one thing, and only one thing, to jump start the economy, what would it be. Cruz answered that it would be to repeal Obamacare. And that will be the first bill he files after his election. He said that he is afraid that Republicans will compromise on this issue but if he is in the Senate, he will not let that happen and thinks that this is so important that he is willing to “lay across the railroad tracks” (my quote, not his) to insure that it is repealed.
I know this was long but our conversation was long and Mr. Cruz has obviously studied the issues over the course of his life and has a firm grasp of what he believes and how best to apply his beliefs to public life. I hope that I have conveyed some small part of that to you.
I really, really appreciate that Mr. Cruz took the time to visit with this voter from Shoreacres. He doesn’t have to do these types of interviews with regular guys like me. I’ll leave you with his parting words to me:
I have to do this. My girls are depending on me.