Republican gubernatorial candidates don't stray far from Blunt's agenda - by Kit Wagar

By Kit Wagar/The Kansas City Star, Mo. Monday, June 23, 2008 8:21 AM CDT As the Republican candidates for Missouri governor begin ramping up their campaigns, Sarah Steelman and Kenny Hulshof have been hitting all the right buttons. They promise to crack down on illegal immigrants, to support tax cuts and to defend the right to carry concealed weapons. They have argued about which of them opposes abortion more. But the most surprising development early in the campaign may be the way both candidates have largely embraced the agenda of current Gov. Matt Blunt, who bowed out of a race for re-election in January amid disapproval ratings that averaged 56 percent in the last three years. Peverill Squire, a political science professor at the University of Missouri-Columbia, said the candidates' acceptance of most of the Blunt agenda suggests that Blunt remains popular among the hard-core Republicans likely to vote in the Aug. 5 primary. "They don't want to alienate those voters," Squire said. "The first step is to win the nomination. The timing of the primary is such that only the most faithful turn out." Hulshof, a six-term congressman from Columbia, talks about increasing restrictions on lawsuits beyond even what Blunt helped enact. He supports Blunt's dramatic expansion of subsidies for producers of ethanol and biodiesel. He also backs Blunt's contentious program to raise money for construction projects through the partial sale of the state's college loan authority. Like Blunt, Hulshof often touts Missouri's need for a more business-friendly climate. And he even defends Blunt's often-criticized move to downsize the state's Medicaid program by ending medical coverage for 90,604 people. "I wouldn't have done it that way, but changes had to be made," Hulshof said, noting that more than a million people were on Missouri Medicaid early in Blunt's term. "The system was unsustainable." Steelman, the state treasurer and a former state senator, mimics Blunt's frequent comments about wasteful government spending. She also defends Blunt's slashing of the Medicaid rolls. While Blunt often touts his support for Missouri's ban on same-sex marriage, Steelman does him one better by pointing out that, as a senator, she sponsored the ban that voters approved in 2004. Steelman spokesman Spence Jackson said his candidate is seeking to reacquaint voters with Steelman's record on high-profile issues such as gun rights and gay marriage. The recent California Supreme Court decision legalizing same-sex marriage shows that the issue is not just about courting the religious right, he said. "These issues transcend party lines," Jackson said. "It's not just social conservatives, but a wide swath of Missouri voters who care about these issues and want to know the candidates' stands on them." Mark Rushefsky, a political science professor at Missouri State University in Springfield, said Steelman and Hulshof are staying close to Blunt's message because of a desire to stick with tried and true Republican themes. Taxes, welfare programs and the judiciary have been Republican themes since the 1950s, he said. Republicans have been criticizing government's role in health care since the 1930s. "The issues haven't changed, just the context," Rushefsky said. "They are issues that work for Republicans, so they stick with them." On health care -- the issue that has bedeviled Blunt since his first month in office -- neither Republican candidate has taken a strong stand. Many Republicans oppose government increasing its role in health care. Yet they see that Blunt's approval rating never exceeded 50 percent after he reduced eligibility for Medicaid to the point that a woman with two children does not qualify if she earns more than about $350 a month. The difficulty facing both Republican candidates is evident from Blunt's experience when he tried to restore most of those cuts with a proposal for Insure Missouri, a plan that drew support from across the political spectrum. He was quickly attacked by Republicans who objected to government subsidizing private health insurance, and the plan went nowhere. Hulshof said he planned to unveil his health-care proposal in the fall. Drawing on his experience on a congressional panel that oversees the federal Medicare program for the elderly, Hulshof acknowledged the issue's complexity. "Health care is hard," Hulshof said. "It's complicated, and I want to get it right." Steelman advocates only a limited government role. Jackson said Steelman thinks that government should bring together the medical and insurance industries to come up with "a common sense, cost-effective way to help those who lack health insurance to obtain it." Rushefsky said another reason that Hulshof and Steelman are not straying far from Blunt's agenda is the difficulty in repudiating a governor of your own party. You risk alienating the governor's supporters and many party regulars who consider criticism of a sitting executive bad form. Squire said both Hulshof and Steelman appear to be flailing around, trying to find an issue that resonates with Republican voters. In the process, however, they have ignored some key constituencies. Neither Hulshof nor Steelman, for example, has met with representatives of the Greater Kansas City Chamber of Commerce, even though the chamber's political arm will decide later this month whose campaign will receive donations. Part of the reason could be the positions Hulshof and Steelman have taken on issues important to the Kansas City business community. Both candidates have come out against research on early stem cells, which the chamber considers a pillar of the region's economic growth plan. "It's an important issue for our economy, for medical research and for health care," said Pete Levi, the chamber's president. "We hope to have an opportunity to convince candidates of its importance to Kansas City." Both candidates also have called for ending the 1 percent earnings tax in Kansas City and St. Louis. The Kansas City chamber, however, supports the tax because of the difficulty in replacing the $206.5 million the tax is expected to generate this year, Levi said. Squire said both candidates run the danger of getting cemented into positions that appeal to a limited part of the electorate. That danger is intensified by lining up with an incumbent whose policies have been largely scorned by the public. "They are banking on the reality that most people are not paying attention," Squire said. "In the general election, they will have to find a way to package their positions to make them a bit more comforting to people in the middle of the political spectrum." To reach Kit Wagar, call 816-234-4440 or send e-mail to kwagar@kcstar.com. To see more of The Kansas City Star, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.kansascity.com. Copyright © 2008, The Kansas City Star, Mo. Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services -- http://www.bransonedge.com http://www.bransonmissouri.blogspot.com