National Review Supports Challenger over Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska)

I've always liked the conservative National Review magazine. I've long suspected that the writers there are anti-corruption Republicans like me. Despite some strong statements against Republican corruption immediately following the 2006 general election, National Review has been disappointingly quiet on this subject since then.

Until now.

Link

When news surfaced last year that Alaska congressman Don Young was facing a federal investigation for possible corruption, it was hardly what Republicans wanted to hear: yet another member of their party under an ethical cloud, following an election in which questions about ethics had cost them dearly.

So far, Young hasn’t been charged with anything, though he has spent some $850,000 on legal fees. Still, something appears to be rotten in the state of Alaska. Earlier this month, James Clark, the chief of staff to former Republican governor Frank Murkowski, pleaded guilty to felony fraud charges involving campaign contributions from VECO, an engineering company. Last year, several Republican legislators and VECO executives were convicted of bribery. GOP senator Ted Stevens is also the subject of a probe...

By now, it has become clear that no matter what federal investigators learn about the congressman’s links to VECO, Don Young’s Way is the wrong way for Republicans.

I first wrote about Rep. Young's dalliance with scandal back in April, 2007. In fact, I later called Alaskan Republicans derelict when it appeared they would not challenge Rep. Young in the primary. I said it was important for Republicans to defeat their own corrupt representatives in the primary rather than wait for the general election. Here in TX22, 62% of the Republican primary electorate voted for Tom DeLay in 2006 despite Mr. DeLay's corruption. Hence, we're stuck with a Democrat in Congress for the next nine months. My accusation that Alaskan Republican were derelict was made in haste, however. Last month, I applauded Alaska Lt. Governor Sean Parnell for challenging Rep. Young in the primary.

Now, National Review is all but endorsing Lt. Gov. Parnell's primary challenge:

A recent poll found that 55 percent of likely voters have an unfavorable view of Young — a number that should concern Republicans who hope Alaska’s only House seat stays in GOP hands. The good news is that there’s now a viable Republican alternative. On March 14, Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell announced a primary challenge to Young. Two years ago, Parnell’s gubernatorial ticket-mate, Sarah Palin, swiped the GOP nomination from the unpopular Murkowsi. She and Parnell went on to win the general election and now Palin is even discussed, in some circles, as a possible vice-presidential candidate...

Parnell, in fact, has the opportunity to do his party a favor, by forcing the retirement of an incumbent who is a walking argument for term limits and making sure his red-state seat doesn’t defect to the Democrats. He has the endorsement of Palin, and he should enjoy the strong support of conservatives.

Way to go National Review! Unfortunately, National Review seems to argue that the less than conservative policy positions of Rep. Young are a bigger problem than the stench of scandal:

By now, it has become clear that no matter what federal investigators learn about the congressman’s links to VECO, Don Young’s Way is the wrong way for Republicans. The problem goes even deeper than concerns about ethics and the addiction to handouts. Young is simply too liberal for his conservative state. In its most recent congressional scorecard, the American Conservative Union gave him a rating of 72 — a poor record that puts him to the left of most of his GOP colleagues in the House. He supports one of Big Labor’s top legislative priorities, a bill that would eliminate secret ballots in union elections. On free trade, he is a reliable protectionist who has opposed Trade Promotion Authority for the president, trade agreements with Chile and Singapore, and a NAFTA provision that would permit Mexican drivers to travel on U.S. interstates. He has also voted against the reauthorization of the Patriot Act.

Does this mean that if Rep. Young's preferred public policy goals were in alignment with the National Review editorial board that National Review wouldn't have taken this stance? C'mon, National Review! I have higher expectations of you!

National Review also gives us this disturbing piece of news:

The National Republican Congressional Committee may feel compelled to prop up Young, much as the National Republican Senatorial Committee tried to do two years ago with Rhode Island senator Lincoln Chafee, a man who ultimately survived his primary, then lost his seat and thanked the GOP by quitting it. Throwing resources behind Young would be another big mistake.

Now I wholeheartedly agree with National Review's position here. If anything, the NRCC should support the clean candidate. I know that Minority Leader John Boehner's "Clear Likelihood" explicitly applied to committee assignments, but is it too much to ask that the NRCC not actively support a dirty politician when a clean one is challenging him?