PRES-08: The Tommy Thompson Question
Why Not?
By Adam C Posted in 2008 — Comments (34) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Like most Republicans considering the 2008 election season, I have been pondering the possible contenders looking for someone who can unify conservatives, moderates, and win over independents. Ideally, a new Reagan would appear before us and all would be good in the world. Instead, Republicans as usual are left with imperfect candidates. Guiliani, McCain, and Romney are eating up diary space and MSM headlines so most of their weaknesses and strengths are known here. My question for the readers is what do you think of ex-GOV, ex-Sec. of HHS Tommy Thompson.
Read on.
Before doing some research, all I knew about Gov. Thompson was that he created the welfare to work program in WI that went national after Republicans won Congress in 1994. This program was a great example of understanding incentives and using economic principles to transfer a government program to make it smaller, more efficient, and more helpful to those it was meant to serve. That's a true form of compassionate conservativism as opposed to the pork-fest that the current crop of Rs has pursued.
After doing a minimal amount of research, I found that Gov. Thompson won 4 elections for Governor and served from 1987-2001. I also found this synopsis from wikipedia:
Thompson's most noted initiatives during his nearly 14 years as governor of Wisconsin were his Wisconsin Works welfare reform and school choice programs. In 1990, Thompson enacted the nation's first parental school-choice program, allowing low-income Milwaukee families to send children to the private or public school of their choice. He also created the BadgerCare program, designed to provide health coverage to those families whose employers don't provide health insurance but make too much money to qualify for Medicaid. Through the federal waiver program, Thompson helped replicate this program in several states when he became Secretary of Health and Human Services.
This reminded me that Gov. Thompson was one of the first to implement another small government, pro-market reform: school choice. Milwaukee has been one of the best examples of school choice in the country and its program needs expanding as the cap on vouchers has been met. Unfortunately, the current Democratic Governor opposes giving parents the right to choose where their children attend school. Nonetheless, Gov. Thompson deserves major credit for another great example of compassionate conservatism. In this case, government getting out of the way has lead to a better school system, more freedom for parents, and less bureaucracy in education.
I don't have a lot of other information, but Gov. Thompson is pro-life and pro-stem cell research and I hear that he sheparded through the Medicare Bill as Sec. of HHS. He could be a credible pro-life moderate who supports most of the 1994 revolution efforts.
If welfare reform and school choice are Gov. Thompson's biggest achievements, I'm surprised that he isn't taken more seriously as a Presidential nominee. He is quite popular in WI and would almost definitely win those 10 EVs and the midwest is the swing region in the country right now. A Thompson/Jeb or Thompson/Pawlenty Governor duo might be a good set of new faces. Or a Thompson/Rice ticket might give it some foreign policy heft.
So there is the tentative case for Mr. Thompson. What are his negatives? Are these positives enough to consider him?
« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims? — Comments (2) | Kos: 'Obama's Race To Lose' — Comments (59) »
PRES-08: The Tommy Thompson Question 34 Comments (0 topical, 34 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
It seems that he has had political ambitions, but he passed on WI GOV and WI SEN in 2006. He has stated that he is opening an exploratory committee (but honestly, who isn't) so he is at least interested.
I don't have much first-hand knowledge but I just did a look around the blogs, where the consensus seems to be that he is a Bush style big government conservative. I also found an interview he did in 2000 which strongly suggests the same thing, although since he was stumping for Bush at the time its perhaps understandable.
He would be a help in picking up crucial mid-west states, so there may be a VP slot in his future.
It's unfortunate that superficial things matter so much in politics, but thats the world we live in. People expect their President to look like he came from Hollywood central casting. I think thats a strike against Thompson, unless he is a dazzling performer on camera.
Haley Barbour has the same problem, plus an unusual name.
Thats why Reagan was so good. Hollywood had nothing on him and he knew what the world is really like outside of Hollywood.
"I wish to have no connection with any ship that does not sail fast; for I intend to go in harm's way."
John Paul Jones (letter to M. Le Ray de Chaumont,16 Nov.1778)
He did shepard the Medicare Bill which is bad news. But it's hard to how he could be a "big government" conservative if welfare reform and school choice are his two big successes. Both streamlined and shrunk government. He seems to be a Newt-like policy wonk and possibly reforming Social Security and Medicare would be on the table.
You are right that this may be one person who could carry his home state as a VP. WI was within 5 points last time and TT is very popular there.
Thompson would kill two coalitions with one stone in his support for government funding of embryonic stem-cell research. Thompson bungled the issue at HHS and would do so again as a nominee. He would turn off social conservatives by approving of the research in the first place and turn off small government conservatives by supporting government funding thereof.
http://www.nationalreview.com/nr_comment/nr_comment030801a.shtml
on the issue as G.H.W.Bush did on abortion to run as Reagans #2
"I wish to have no connection with any ship that does not sail fast; for I intend to go in harm's way."
John Paul Jones (letter to M. Le Ray de Chaumont,16 Nov.1778)
I don't want this to thread jack my own story, but I'm not sure using stem cell research as a litmus test is a good idea in 2008. I can understand social conservatives wanting to make sure there is a pro-life candidate and/or making sure a candidate is a supporter of traditional marriage. But stem cell research is hurting Rs among moderate voters and helped put the Senate in D hands (MO, VA). I'd be fine with a candidate who opposed embryonic stem cell research but it probably should not be a litmus test.
and I do not think it would be allowed to become a major issue if he runs at POTUS(unless MSM tries to make it one to divide the party). I would also like to see what kind of judges he would appoint. If he is anything like Bush I think all would be well with social conservatives.
I hope to hear much more from the Gov. I would also like to see a few others(Govoners) throw thier hats in the ring.
"I wish to have no connection with any ship that does not sail fast; for I intend to go in harm's way."
John Paul Jones (letter to M. Le Ray de Chaumont,16 Nov.1778)
I'm not sure that the stem-cell issue hurt Republicans all that much. To the extent that it did, I think it was similar to how Roe vs Wade can play against Republicans in that the media went along with the Left's lies about the issue. Just as they present a false image of what Roe does, and what would happen if it were gone, so too does the Left and media deliberately confuse the matter of stem cells by refusing to differentiate between embryonic research and adult-cell research, and in confusing a lack of federal funding for a federal ban. But media bias is something that is not going away, so its almost pointless to complain about it.
But I do agree that this issue should not be a litmust test for GOP nominees. I understand the Christian conservative base's feelings on the matter, but they need to realize that the issues on which the overall public is with them -- opposition to abortion on demand, support for traditional marriage, support for conservative/restrained judges, oppostion to insane Establishment Clause decisions, etc -- are put at risk when demanding purity on the stem cell issue. It is simply too easy for the media to paint a false picture of extremism on this issue.
carries more credibility than a Sen. I would rather have someone who has had that executive experience as opposed to a Senator who can much easier side step accountability if he/she compromises with core values than a State Gov.
"I wish to have no connection with any ship that does not sail fast; for I intend to go in harm's way."
John Paul Jones (letter to M. Le Ray de Chaumont,16 Nov.1778)
It seems to me he is a guy who "grew" in office to become less conservative and more "compassionate" at the end.
The last few years his governorship were not particularly good in terms of either spending or taxes. You might want to check the Cato report cards for the details.
He reminds me quite a bit of W. W did some very good things too... but the things we was wrong on, he was FAR wrong on. I would expect Thompson to be the same kind of leader. Better than the Democrat alternative, but nothing I'm going to get excited about right now.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
Tommy is very similar to Bush... except I'd have expected him to be more attentive to the outlook of the war (manage the PR a bit better... of course could it have been worse?). In that respect, I'd expect Thompson to shrink from bad press and have more a weaselly spine... which is George's remaining chief asset at this juncture. So to sum... George Bush's cousin with no spine.. not too pretty.
Thompson has a few negitives that will rear its head sooner or later.
1) Terrible 'Uper' accent. Think the movie 'Fargo' if you need reference. If 6 years of the presidency hasn't broken Bush of his linquistic falterings... it's not going to happen for Tommy either.
2) He Liked the Beltway way too much. Tommy enjoyed his time in DC too much and would kowtow his Presidency to remain in their esteem. If you could tolerate the NYT and WaPo actually having policy influences on your Republican presidency... you have a higher constitution that I do.
3) Has Skeletons Herb Kohl is gay. For all I know, Russ Feingold humps goats. Tommy Thompson sleeps around (at least that is the story), but at least its with other women. Now this is barely even discussed in Wisconsin.. for whatever reason. But I doubt they can survive a national campaign (true or not).
"Took the nickname Troll long before BlogTrolls existed..."
I found an article that mentioned Tommy Thompson had received a grade B in 1996, and he was disappointed when he was in a later year given a C. The governors that have gotten a grad D from Cato include Romney, Huckabee, and Pataki. From the list of former governors running in '08 Thompson gets the best grade from Cato.
You’re a persistent cuss, pilgrim.
John Wayne to Jimmy Stewart in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance
It goes into why he his grades got worse at the end. Not particularly encouraging stuff.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
to an article by Cato that lumps together a list of Big Brother Republicans. This is the first time I ever saw the names of Mitt Romney, Tommy Thompson, and Newt Gingrich as part of the same wing.
http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2006/08/03/republicans-for-big-brother/
You’re a persistent cuss, pilgrim.
John Wayne to Jimmy Stewart in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance
Or was that another Midwest Governor being promoted as a potential candidate?
He just won re-election in a slight blue state despite "the wave" of 2006. He's sharp, pro-life, and popular. He endorsed McCain and is probably on the short list for VP.
Was this back in 2000 or more recently? Do you have a source on this?
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
According to the press, he is promoting McCain but has not yet endorsed him. I wonder if this is a technicality since McCain is not officially running yet. Yeah, actually in another Strib article it has this to say "Pawlenty told the New York Times that he intended to support McCain if the senator ran for president." That's about as endorsement-y as they get right now.
I had the pleasure of having Thompson as my governor from 1987-2001.
He was fought by the teacher's union tooth and nail re: the school choice issue, but he won. Thus started a grand experiment that should be a showcase in GOP know-how. The ones who have benefited the most are the African-Americans who have been stuck with sub-standard, often violence-infested schools.
As for welfare reform, he was cast in WI media as cruel and as one who'd take the food out of children's mouths. He proved them wrong again.
Tony Earl (TT's predecessor) left WI an industrial cesspool. Thompson helped turn it around with various initiatives.
I disagree with his stem-cell stance. Given the proper publicity regarding his achievements, I think he stands a decent shot.
Personally, I want someone who can unify Conservatives. mollycoddling with clueless moderates and the left has always proven to be the wrong thing to do.
The last thing the Republicans need is a Big Tent and invite everybody philosophy. Reagan and Nixon are the only presidential candidates for whom I've voted and not had second thoughts.
I have no idea for whom I shall vote in '08.
Don
===========================
Democratic is a process.
Democrat is what they are.
===========================
If he'd run in 2000, he would have had my vote or at least my strong consideration. His work for the Bush Administration does compromise him in that regards.
I also don't think Stem Cell research is killing us among moderates. That's more media perception than reality.
From a Purely Political POV:
I mean...do you really go from HHS Secretary to the presidency? I know that he's been governor, but if he wanted to run, I really wish that he'd run against Herb Kohl this election cycle. I guess he forewent that in order to launch a long-shot bid at the presidency? I don't know...for someone who has a pretty low national profile, that doesn't seem to be the smartest political move.
From a Policy POV:
I don't think that I could support anyone who did anything short of resign the Administration in portest over Medicare Rx.
Inhofe is the real deal, nothing less will do.
Tommy Thompson's brother Ed Thompson is a City Councilman in Tomah, WI. He's also former Mayor. He owns the very popular TeePee Bar right across the street from Town Hall.
Tommy has a fantastic sense of humor and is quite popular in Wisconsin. Ed Thompson is also a former professional boxer.
He's got some ties to the Libertarian Party; the LP is trying to get him to run for President on their ticket, along with World Champion Poker Player Greg Raymer.
But I say we recruit him as a Republican for 2008! He'd win the blue collar vote, for sure!
Eric Dondero
www.mainstreamlibertarian.com
I really appreciate your efforts to mend libertarian-conservative fractures. But Ed is a Libertarian, not a libertarian Republican. He ran for Governor as a Libertarian and did rather well. He should consider running in the R primary for SEN or GOV at some point. But city councilors don't become Presidents without something in between.
It is nice to know that Tommmy has a close relative who is so libertarian.
Would be interesting if Tommy got the GOP nomination and Ed got the LP nomination. Probably bad for the GOP as it would probably give the Dems Wisconsin's electoral votes.
I don't think so. This is a wartime election. If you can't speak to those issues, you don't stand a chance in the GOP primaries. It's why Romney has a tough hill to climb and why some folks keep mentioning Newt (who would be persona non grata in a more peaceful era). The little secret of politics between 1944 and 1976 is that governors weren't such great presidential candidates when the nation's security was a top priority. Carter won in the wake of the Watergate meltdown and Reagan was the exception that proves the rule (a governor with a deeply held ideologically-informed view of the Cold War).
If the Thompsons and Huckabees of the world have not raised huge amounts of money by the spring (I don't think they will), how are they going to compete with heavily staffed, well-funded candidates? They won't. They should ask Dan Quayle, Lamar Alexander, John Kasich, and Liddy Dole about their experiences in 2000. We've seen this movie and it's a short.
"I wish to have no connection with any ship that does not sail fast; for I intend to go in harm's way."
John Paul Jones (letter to M. Le Ray de Chaumont,16 Nov.1778)
"I wish to have no connection with any ship that does not sail fast; for I intend to go in harm's way."
John Paul Jones (letter to M. Le Ray de Chaumont,16 Nov.1778)
I see that you put 1944 to 1976. Oh well, at least I refreshed myself on some Presidental History
"I wish to have no connection with any ship that does not sail fast; for I intend to go in harm's way."
John Paul Jones (letter to M. Le Ray de Chaumont,16 Nov.1778)
The little secret of politics between 1944 and 1976 is that governors weren't such great presidential candidates when the nation's security was a top priority.
I would not say that security was the overriding factor of those elections. I don't see much difference there when compared to many other elections outside of that single period of time.
Another thing worth considering: that list of 5 Presidents is long on particularly bad Presidents and completely devoid of any great ones. Legislators do not make good Presidents.
---
Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. - Milton Friedman
those facts about him. Based on what you have reserched the positives are enough to really start paying attention to him.
I have not heard much about how serious he is about running.
Has anyone heard?
"I wish to have no connection with any ship that does not sail fast; for I intend to go in harm's way."
John Paul Jones (letter to M. Le Ray de Chaumont,16 Nov.1778)