Sen. Jim DeMint: An Absent SC Force?
Senator redefining role of his office and rankling many in the process.
Political power is a tricky thing. Though constantly talked about, it is near impossible to measure and rarely reveals itself publicly. To be sure, Sen. Jim DeMint has that power.
South Carolina’s junior senator has acquired the reputation as a “kingmaker,” having raised millions of dollars through the Senate Conservatives Fund, a political action committee he founded prior to the 2010 mid-term elections. DeMint has also emerged as the de facto national leader of the Tea Party.
He was re-elected without serious opposition in 2010 and at this time last year, he was planning a Labor Day Forum with presidential candidates. With the exception of Rick Perry, who had to back out at the last second, all of the major candidates attended the forum in hopes of securing a coveted DeMint endorsement—an endorsement that DeMint ultimately never extended to any of them.
DeMint is almost certainly the most popular politician in South Carolina since Strom Thurmond. DeMint is so popular, in fact, that no one seems to be upset by the fact that he hasn’t held a public session with constituents in nearly five months.
DeMint spoke at a fundraiser for Mitt Romney last week, at the Silver Elephant Dinner in May, and at an event for Jeb Bush in April. Attendance at all of those events required a donation. DeMint also hosted a reception for service academy candidates recently and addressed graduates of South University in June. DeMint’s last open door session with voters appears to have been in early April in Rock Hill.
At this time of year, with Congress in recess, it is not unusual for office-holders to meet with constituents. DeMint’s counterpart in South Carolina, Lindsey Graham has traveled throughout the state talking about the dangers sequestration could have on military bases.
As far as neighboring states, Georgia Sen. Johnny Isakson (R) has held six town halls this month and holds monthly telephone town halls. In North Carolina, Sen. Richard Burr (R) had 18 public events in August alone, while Kay Hagan (D) has had “75 Conversations with Kay” since taking office in 2009 and nine this month.
If DeMint hasn’t been a presence in South Carolina he has been one in Texas, Nebraska, Wisconsin and Arizona—all states where the Senate Conservatives Fund raised money for candidates and where DeMint made appearances on their behalf.
When asked about DeMint’s dearth of public appearances in the Palmetto State, State GOP Executive Director Matt Moore bristled at the suggestion that DeMint had lost interest in South Carolina. Moore said that splashy, media-friendly events were overblown by the media.
“Senator Jim DeMint is a work horse, not a show pony,” Moore said. “Over the past few months, he's held hundreds of individual and small group meetings with constituents in both South Carolina and D.C. Those meetings don't make front pages, but they certainly impact individual lives and families right here in South Carolina.”
A National Player in a New Way
Since the electoral success of 2010, DeMint has made it clear that his priority is remaking the Senate with politicians like himself.
As University of South Carolina professor of political science Mark Tompkins notes, DeMint is hardly the first senator to accrue influence outside his home state. Tompkins compared DeMint to his philosophical opposite, the late Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts, who was a national figure for decades.
But DeMint may be in the process of redefining what it means to be a United States Senator in a way Kennedy never did.
“He’s not new,” Tompkins said. “What’s new are the issues he’s talking about and how he’s trying to deal with those issues.”
In previous generations, Senators and House members were their state’s biggest advocates, helping to deliver federal projects (which meant money and jobs) back home—pejoratively referred to as “pork.” Though a sore point with taxpayers, few voters ever complained when goodies came to their state or congressional district.
But DeMint has sworn off earmarks, citing them as one of the symptoms of the disease of living inside the D.C. Beltway, where meaningful legislation gets neutered by funding for projects that have little economic impact and exist primarily to spit shine a politician’s resume when it comes time for re-election.
Re-election, by the way, is not something DeMint says he’ll seek once his present term ends in 2016.
According to a DeMint staff member authorized to speak on background only, DeMint returns home as much as possible and is not a creature of Washington. He has little interest in having buildings or highways named after him.
This approach frees him up to be the kind of Senator that has rarely been seen in Washington.
According to Tompkins, DeMint and the people of South Carolina are an excellent example of a politician representing the values of his constituents, and vice versa.
“(DeMint) has been consistent throughout his tenure and set expectations for voters,” Tompkins said.
But the fact that DeMint is rarely seen in South Carolina is a problem for outgoing State Rep. Boyd Brown (D – Fairfield). “I wish we could keep him out permanently. He’s put his selfish personal ambitions ahead of the people who sent him to Washington,” Brown said.
"He represents the type of people who are only interested in getting theirs and once they do they say ‘Screw everybody else.’”
What’s Next
Though DeMint insists he won’t seek re-election or run for President, not everyone believes him.
Regardless, Kyle Kondik of the University of Virginia Center for Politics thinks DeMint’s strategy makes sense. “He said he’s not running for re-election, so he can focus on his national goals,” Kondik said. “And if he does end up running for president he’s going to win South Carolina anyway, so he’s building a national network of support right now.”
But Kondik cautions DeMint into not taking the Palmetto State for granted. “There is an expectation that elected officials be available,” Kondik said. “He could be vulnerable to someone who says he’s not responsive to South Carolina.”
The idea of DeMint losing a re-election campaign seems improbable. Indeed, since 1930, no South Carolina senator who has served a full term has lost a re-election campaign.
Last month, DeMint separated from the Senate Conservative Fund and announced the creation of his own Super PAC called Senate Action. It means that DeMint can now raise unlimited amounts of money—the Senate Conservative Fund was forced to cap donations at $5,000. It’s a testament to DeMint’s power that he created a Super PAC on his own. Few, if any, senators have such influence.
That influence has come at a cost, though.
He has no doubt rankled his own party’s leadership by helping fund candidates to defeat fellow Republicans that DeMint did not deem to conservative enough. Among the victims are Richard Luger of Indiana, Bob Bennett of Utah, Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania and Charlie Crist of Florida (Specter and Crist eventually left the Republican Party).
Nebraska Sen. Mike Johanns said that DeMint’s involvement in the Senate race in the Cornhusker State in May resulted in a weaker Republican winning the primary.
While campaigning in Texas for Ted Cruz, DeMint was advised by Perry to keep his nose out of Lone Star State politics.
Some GOP commentators think DeMint has done more harm than good to the Republican cause.
It’s telling that among the dozens of speakers at this week’s Republican National Convention, DeMint is not among them.
And in South Carolina a few Republicans have suggested—though not on the record—that they’d like to see DeMint use some of his substantial influence to help candidates closer to home.
In the next year, that influence could be tested. Graham is up for re-election in 2014 and is almost certain to be challenged in the primary from his right, possibly by Tom Davis (R – Beaufort), who has become a darling of the Tea Party.
Graham has compiled a campaign war chest of $7 million and if Davis is to put up a serious fight, he’ll need to approach that total. Would DeMint use his Super PAC to help Davis get there?
JoSCh
8:37 am on Tuesday, August 28, 2012
If there is one thing SC needs it's even less gov't oversight. This rice isn't going to harvest itself.
Richard Hayes
9:09 am on Tuesday, August 28, 2012
What has Senator DeMint done for South Carolina? Instead of working to improve our 49th in the nation in education, he is out raising money for radical right groups. Instead of working to improve Charleston Harbor, he is actually fighting it. Instead of helping feed the 20% children in this state that go to be hungry, he is cutting programs. He wants to cut regulations that have given us clean air and clean water, put oil rigs off our beautiful coast, and de-regulate the finance industry more - the same industry that got us into the Great Recession! So glad he has decided not to run again for Senator.
John H
11:37 am on Tuesday, August 28, 2012
Dear Mr. Hayes, "..49th in the nation in education..."
This is a repost from several months ago.
On behalf of the hardworking and dedicated educators and administrators in our South Carolina public schools, I’d like to submit some information I found that is a little more positive than the political unconstructive rhetoric that abounds regarding education in South Carolina.
This comes from a study done by Quality Counts as reported by Education Week. Both are funded by special interests but none that would present a bias toward South Carolina specifically. http://www.edweek.org/ew/marketplace/products/qc2012-shr.html?intc=EW-QC12-LFTNAV
South Carolina’s grade in student academic and teacher standards are near the top. The numeric values place SC 8th in the nation for academic standards and 2nd in Teacher standards.
The statistic that everyone dials in on is the academic achievement scores. We do rank very low at 45th. However, each state sets their own standardize test values. South Carolina’s are very high. Adjusting for the high standards, the study would put SC well above its current position.
.
John H
11:38 am on Tuesday, August 28, 2012
Continued,
There are other statistics included but altogether this report gives the South Carolina Education a C+, well above the abyss that we are told to believe.
South Carolina is burdened with a rank of 47th among the states in SAT scores. However, we are one of a few states where more than 70 percent of all students take the SAT test. Illinois is the top ranked state but only 5 percent of the students take the SAT. Of the top 20 performing states, 18 have a participation rate below 10 percent.
South Carolina’s aggregate ranking among the states is above the mean, not near dead last as the politicians and special interest groups would have us believe.
Therefore, I would respectfully ask that you give the students and educators of this State a modicum of credit for their hard work and determination
JoSCh
12:25 pm on Tuesday, August 28, 2012
Illinois uses the ACT, 100% of their graduates take it as juniors. They are middle of the pack when it comes to that. SC is predictably at the bottom of that list too, with 57% of our graduates taking that test, higher than the national average. http://www.act.org/newsroom/data/2012/states.html
You aren't serving the educators, you're attempting to undermine them. Be honest at least.
The link you provided costs $4.95. You work for them? Regardless, the report card you mentioned has one state getting a D+ and no states getting higher than a B+. They aren't biased against SC, they're biased against progressive ideology in any way; it's funded by the Pew Charitable Trusts who's mission is to propagandize the evils of bureaucracy, all while enjoying the fruits of subsidized oil.
John H
1:17 pm on Tuesday, August 28, 2012
No JoSCH, I am not a Pew trust employee, or a Koch Bros. operative, or a covert functionary for Howard Rich. You can get to the reports through a back door.
This was an honest attempt to give the teachers and students some credit for their hard work and to make them feel like they have accomplished something.
Not everything, JoSCH, is a conspiracy against you and your world view.
I have a question for you JoSCH and Richard Hayes. Do you think the teachers and students of this state deserve some credit for the job they are doing?
JoSCh
3:49 pm on Tuesday, August 28, 2012
You posted a pay for link like any common spammer, do you just buy everything that somebody posts on the internet?
Yes, they do. That is why I fought for their raises that the governor vetoed but the state legislature ultimately overrode. Why do you think linking a pay for conservative biased website that aims to show that all is well is giving them credit? What they really like is successful students and fair pay, not biased online kudos.
Are you going to respond to the ACT or just brush that off? Or is the ACT also not a good indicator?
John H
5:43 pm on Tuesday, August 28, 2012
It was a simple question JoSCH. I am not a common spammer. I found a site that projected a more positive outlook. Appoogies if your offended. The gist of the whole thing is to bring to peoples attention that SC is not dead last.
Was there a question in your rant? Can you please refrase it please?
JoSCh
6:38 pm on Tuesday, August 28, 2012
I answered your question. Yes, they do. And your link still isn't giving them credit at all. Still, I find your disingenuous response refreshing.
You can tell the questions by the punctuation at the end of them. Should I relist them for you? <-- protip, that is a question mark, indicating a question.
And just because someone calls out your incorrect or biased data doesn't make it a rant. Admittedly I do get bored knocking down the same poorly framed arguments from you guys. Try harder? Like I said, the disingenuous tack was something you don't see too much out of you guys. Beats reading wall o' text bible verse in ALLCAPS with terrible spelling, grammar, and punctuation.
John H
9:54 pm on Tuesday, August 28, 2012
What’s disingenuous about complimenting SC teachers and students? I don’t like it when people falsely claim that SC is dead last in education. I feel compelled to rebut the claim. True, the data came from a biased source, I predicated the fact before the comment, but the conclusions are all mine.
Feel free to check out another site that indicates that SC has a lot of room for improvement but not dead last. http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/. The data suggests that SC students are better prepared for post secondary education than the previous year’s results.
Don’t paint me with that “you guys” brush. Ask me what I think about Jim DeMint. I think his rhetoric too extreme for my taste. I thought that of Regan also.
JoSCh
10:24 pm on Tuesday, August 28, 2012
If all you meant was to pay a compliment to the teachers then I guess I'll ignore the flawed data. They do the best with what they have and they certainly deserve credit for that. Sorry if I jumped to conclusions, your reply to me was typical internet troll response, so I assumed you were. Again, my apologies.
Jeff Davis
9:20 am on Tuesday, August 28, 2012
Although I would enjoy attending a DeMint event, he is doing what he is supposed to do. Senators represent each states and each states interest, but they do national work. That's why they are elected to 6 year terms. House members (with 2 year terms) are more locally oriented. DeMint is more capable to help SC when SC needs it given his national influence than the typical Senator. Yes, more SC appearances would be nice ... but for "right now" I say: "keep being the workhorse, we don't need more show ponies".
JoSCh
9:30 am on Tuesday, August 28, 2012
It's neat how instead of coming up with your own thoughts you parroted the state GOP executive director. Way to stay on message! It's just a matter of time before you have your own talk radio show.
Colnzgprnts
11:08 am on Tuesday, August 28, 2012
Jim DeMint represents everything that is good in government. He is popular in SC because he is the antithesis of all that causes citizens to have a low regard for government at all levels.
If we could add another 99 senators cut from the same cloth as Jim DeMint we would stop our slide into collectivism and restore this country to its position of greatness..
JoSCh
12:36 pm on Tuesday, August 28, 2012
Diversity and differing opinions are the enemies of your DeMint America? I don't disagree at all actually. Jackboots for everyone!
/as long as you look/think/act like me
//you're going to have to provide your own jackboots. What are you, some kind of commie?
Shawn Drury
1:47 pm on Tuesday, August 28, 2012
Ok, I'm sorry...but I have to rise to the defense of collectivism, which in itself is kind of startling.
Collectivism has somehow become this bumper sticker catch-all excuse, pulled from the pages of Ayn Rand, to quickly describe the problems our country faces. In fact, collectivism means putting the needs of the group above the self which would seem to align nicely with the Republican Party that believes in slogans such as "Country First" and "A rising tide lifts all boats."
Further, individualism, particularly in an economic context, is a zero-sum game. I win, you lose. I'm rich, you aren't. This is exactly the kind of thing Mitt Romney and numerous other Republicans before him have criticized--pitting groups of people against each other.
Critics of collectivism (sorry, Colnzgprnts) sound a bit selfish rather than interested in what's best for the country. If we have a country filled with 300 million individuals looking out only for their interests or the interests of their group, we have a real problem. I'm not about to speak for him, but I suspect Sen. DeMint would agree we need to think more about our country than ourselves.
A strong argument could be made that what got us into the mess we are currently in was rampant individualism. What made this country great is that in times of crisis, we have looked out for our fellow man, regardless of where he went to church or the color of his skin. Maybe it's naive, but it seems we ought to get back to this value, and fast.
Dr. John
8:45 pm on Tuesday, August 28, 2012
Shawn,
You need to be a little more curious when considering your ideology. Self interest is one of the hallmarks of economic freedom. The cattle farmer in Wyoming is'nt growing cattle because he knows that I like and want steak or hamburgers. He is growning steak to make a living for himself and his family. I am also not buying the steak to support a cattle farmer. I am buying the steak because I like steak. However, because we are both pursuing our own self interest we are indirectly serving each other without any primary intention of doing so. In this process though hundreds of other people benefit from his and my self interest. For example, in my self interest of eating steak, I did not consider that by buying it I would also be benefiting the truck driver, the grower of the hay, the employees or owner of a grocery store, the maker of the packaging or even the taxes I pay on it to the state, but all of these people benefit by me pursing my self interest. Also, individualism is not a zero sum game for an economy. If individualism is a zero sum game, and we apparently are suffering from too much of it , how do you explain the growth of our economy over the last 130 years compared to the collectivist minded countries (russia, china, venezuela, cuba). If growth is a zero sum game why does our gross domestic product go up, should'nt it be 0.0 by your theory? If you want poverty, look at these countries first. Or just look at what poverty was in the US just 60 years ago.
stanley seigler
11:41 pm on Tuesday, August 28, 2012
@Dr. John
'Self interest is one of the hallmarks of economic freedom.' dr john has offered this opine before...this is milton friedman's, atheist ayn rand's, unproven opine...actually 1929/2008 proved it didn't work...
jefferson's opine:
[CLIP]...in Jefferson’s day, “self-interest, or rather self-love, or egoism” was being proposed by some as the basis of morality, but the drafter of the Declaration of Independence was having none of it...Self-love, Jefferson warned, “is no part of morality. Indeed it is exactly its counterpart. It is the sole antagonist of virtue, leading us constantly by our propensities to self-gratification in violation of our moral duties to others... Take from man his selfish propensities, and he can have nothing to seduce him from the practice of virtue.” [end clip]
http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2012/08/15/ayn-rand-paul-ryan-and-the-issue-of-morality/
sad GOPs embraced friedman/rand and advocated their philosophy that lead to 2008...sadder still GOPs/MITT want to repeat these policy failures...
apologies for basically off topic remarks...but have nothing nice to say about demint..so just responded to the doc...
ReadIt
6:17 pm on Tuesday, August 28, 2012
Most of us buy groceries, DeMint buys Congressional seats. What an American.
JoSCh
6:30 pm on Tuesday, August 28, 2012
In his defense, all politicians buy their seats. Certainly at the national level, and more often than not at the state and local level. The system is fatally flawed if your goal is to serve the people.
jonas67
8:39 pm on Tuesday, August 28, 2012
This guy has done nothing for the citizens of SC. He's a right wing nut and the sooner he goes the better.
Shawn Drury
11:39 pm on Tuesday, August 28, 2012
Dr. John, I guess you could be more condescending, but I'm not sure how.
I never said growth was a zero-sum proposition--you did. If you're going to patronize someone at least quote them properly.
stanley seigler
12:51 am on Wednesday, August 29, 2012
@Shawn Drury: '...quote them properly...'
this is a tactic of some/many on PATCH...mis quote then prove the mis-quote is wrong...distract and beg the question...
not only on PATCH...in addition to the big lie, the GOPs use it effectively to win elections...
Dr. John
7:42 am on Wednesday, August 29, 2012
Shawn,
Your quote, not mine "Further, individualism, particularly in an economic context, is a zero-sum game. I win, you lose. I'm rich, you aren't."
Stanley,
Self Love (Vanity) and Self Interest are not the same. Selfishness and self interest are not the same either. As you know selfishness leads people to "unfairly" take more than they have earned or deserve. Self interest is pursuing what is best for you and your family.
JoSCh
9:28 am on Wednesday, August 29, 2012
"selfishness leads people to "unfairly" take more than they have earned or deserve. Self interest is pursuing what is best for you and your family."
How do you reconcile the radically increased income disparity between CEOs and workers? http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304458604577490842584787190.html
stanley seigler
10:50 am on Wednesday, August 29, 2012
@Dr. John: '...Self Love (Vanity) and Self Interest are not the same. Selfishness and self interest are not the same either...
why does humpty dumpty come to mind...there are those who disagree with your opine ...eg, jefferson and me:)...repeating:
'jefferson's opine: [CLIP]...in Jefferson’s day, “self-interest, or rather self-love, or egoism” was being proposed by some as the basis of morality, but the drafter of the Declaration of Independence was having none of it...Self-love, Jefferson warned, “is no part of morality"...
thanks for bringing up vanity (vain, empty, valueless) as it is a characteristic of those who believe self-interest/love trumps the general welfare...
so much for the distraction: the humpty dumpty semantics discussion...and to the bottom line:
self-interests are not compatible with the general welfare (well maybe in nirvana) of our country and our 'neighbors'...ie/eg;
increasing the profits (self interest) of the kockbros and 1%-ers: destroys the middle class; returns po folks to po farms; returns the disable to snake pits; and has resulted in economic disasters (1929/2008)
Shawn Drury
8:43 am on Wednesday, August 29, 2012
Nowhere did I say growth was a zero-sum deal. You did. Somewhere in your mind you think growth and individualism are one in the same. Or that individualism promotes growth. It doesn't. And the idea that it does is strictly theoretical.
Dr. John
5:55 pm on Tuesday, September 18, 2012
That is correct economic growth and individualism are directly correlated when considering the best way to protect human rights. Left to their own devices, almost all individuals will seek growth on their own unless their are economic disincentives (high taxes or over-regulation) or barriers to growth (think of a womens lack of rights to work in the mid east). Government can provide incentives for growth but those are almost always at the penalty to others in a like sector of the economy. For example, when the government gives a tax break to home owners that is an indirect penalty to people who do not own houses. I will ask a very good question...Can you name a country that has economic growth without individualism that has our same standard of living?
Mimi
7:51 am on Sunday, September 2, 2012
Jim Dimwitt the spokeman for John Birch Society and spreader of Ayn Rand's aethistism.