Yes. I’m a flip-flopper. Of the first degree. Item #225 on the very long list of reasons I could never run for public office.
The latest example: The proposed (and languishing, but not yet dead) expansion of the S-CHIP program. First, I was generally in favor of it. Then, I was soundly against it. And then … the factors that prompted me to change my position were challenged by certain astute TMV readers in the back-and-forth comments attached to the October 12 “Center of Attention” feature.
So I decided to stop the lazy approach to forming an opinion on this subject (i.e., reading and borrowing the opinions of others) and do a little original homework of my own. Specifically, I decided to seek the input of Republicans who originally supported the expansion and still do, despite the President’s veto. I wanted these Republicans’ views on the matter because I thought they’d have the biggest stake in defending their position against the White House’s talking points.
It didn’t take long to find Republican Senator Pat Roberts from Kansas. The Senator is no RINO; his heritage and credentials lean solidly right:
… the son of the late Wes Roberts, Chairman of the Republican National Committee under President Dwight Eisenhower … He joined the staff of Kansas’ U.S. Senator Frank Carlson [R] in 1967. In 1969, Roberts became Administrative Assistant to First District U.S. Congressman Keith Sebelius [R]. Roberts was elected to Congress in 1980, succeeding Sebelius upon his retirement. He was first elected to the U.S. Senate in 1996 following the retirement of Senator Nancy Kassebaum [R] … and won re-election in 2002.
And yet, Sen. Roberts has stood up valiantly against the White House’s spin machine, attempting to set the record straight on the meat vs. mythology of the S-CHIP bill.
Of course, Roberts wasn’t the only source that eventually led me back into the fold as a supporter of the bill: Another was my own Republican Senator, Missouri’s Kit Bond; yet another was this NYT story from last week, published the day before the veto-override attempt in the House. But, as I note at Central Sanity, I think Roberts’ voice deserves special attention, given that he is not only a Republican but a member of the Senate Finance Committee that helped birth the disputed legislation.
What good does all of this do? I don’t know. But I do hope Roberts’ Republican counterparts in the House (13 of them, at least) will take note of the Senator from Kansas’s arguments, and reconsider their own positions when Speaker Pelosi and crew make another run at stiff-arming the President’s obstinance.