by David Safier
Dear Representative Barber,
I write this as someone who expended a bit of sweat and treasure in your recent campaign and plan to do so again between now and November. I'm a supporter, but a more cautious supporter today than I was a few days ago.
Your two recent votes, one risking the environment to beef up border patrols and the other holding the Attorney General in civil contempt, were terrible votes in my opinion. However, I want to skip over the first and look at the second. I expect you, like Giffords before you, will make votes I dislike, and your border vote falls into that category. I don't know whether you actually believe giving the border patrol a pass on environmental issues is a good idea or you think your vote was the politically expedient thing to do with the November election a few months away, but I can agree to disagree with you on that one. Your vote against Holder, on the other hand, is simply unconscionable.
True, you voted against the worst of the two contempt measures against Holder, the one calling for criminal contempt. But your vote for the civil contempt measure, which allows Darrell Issa's committee to file a lawsuit demanding withheld documents, was a disturbing choice.
Let's look at the pros and cons of the vote for civil contempt.
On the pro side: You can say Obama's use of executive privilege to protect the documents is questionable. You can say, to fully understand what happened in the Fast and Furious operation, it's necessary to see all the relevant documents. You can also say this issue is especially important to you because the incidents occurred in and around your district.
On the con side: Your vote helps give cover to a partisan witch hunt by Darrell Issa and his cronies whose sole intent is to hang a scandal around Obama's neck. The over-hyped Fast and Furious investigation is part of the effort which began the day after Obama's election to dirty him up and damage his reelection chances. The added Republican bonus for going after Holder is that the process may weaken him enough, he'll be less effective in his attempts to root out the voter suppression schemes Republicans are using to try and steal elections.
When you weigh the pros and the cons, there's no contest. You don't help Republicans use a congressional committee to attack Obama hammer and tong simply because Issa has created a weak justification to call for a contempt vote. By way of analogy, you wouldn't help Joe McCarthy with his vile, wide ranging anti-Communist witch hunt because, well, he's kind of right that some of the people he's going after are kind of bad actors.
Your contempt vote was a very bad call. I hope it's a rookie error which occurred because you were thrown into some major votes before you had a chance to get your bearings. If, however, you plan to cast similarly indefensible votes in the future in the interest of your concept of "bipartisanship," you can count me out as a supporter.
Sincerely,
David Safier
Discover more from Blog for Arizona
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I want to take issue with Rep. Barber. In his press release, he states “That means taking firm and quick action against the cartels and stopping the flow of drugs and violence into our country.” Rep. Barber seems to believe that a military solution is at hand. Either he is disingenuous or he continues to pander to the border ranchers. When I spoke to him early in his campaign about the issue, I pointed out that the “war on drugs” is a colossal failure which has now cost tens of thousands of lives and created havoc in Mexico and has ruined millions of lives in our country; not to mention the billions of wasted tax dollars. I asked him to consider the proposition of removing the contraband from the cartels through controlled production and distribution of marijuana in the USA. He dismissed it out of hand with a remark that “that will never happen”. I replied that indeed it will never happen if we continue to send people to Congress with that mindset. I am disgusted with his early conduct. Notwithstanding the vote against the criminal contempt charge, his first two votes were the same as we would have had if Jesse Kelly had won.
Barber’s press release is far too coy and clever. It does not DIRECTLY address the fact that he voted FOR the civil contempt citation. It does DIRECTLY address the fact that he voted AGAINST the criminal contempt citation. He has also still not put anything out that addresses in sufficient detail why he voted for the immigration bill cited in your post. My hope is that he will address these points in detail in debates with Heinz. He is still my candidate…but I will be very tempted to bail if he does not agree to take on Heinz in debates!
I must admit I am very concerned over both of these votes. Clearly, it give new legs to the Heinz campaign which I previously thought was a waste of time. Now, I’m not so sure. I’m certainly not endorsing either one of them, but I can’t emphasize how deeply disturbed I am over these votes. Perhaps someone needs to remind Barber that he must win a primary before a general election.
I think Ron Barber was the perfect choice to fill the remainder of Gabby’s elected term in office. But even as I voted for & supported Barber for the CD8 special election I was leaning toward Matt Heinz for a full term in the new CD2. Barber has just made my choice very easy, I’m voting for Matt.
To add information to this discussion, here is the entire Media Release Barber put out on June 28 explaining his vote.
U.S. REP. RON BARBER REJECTS PARTISAN GAMES ON HOLDER CONTEMPT VOTE
Congressman calls on administration to comply with Congress and calls for real progress on border security
TUCSON – U.S. Rep. Ron Barber today issued the following statement on the House of Representatives contempt vote against Attorney General Eric Holder over Operation Fast and Furious:
First of all, it should never be the policy of the US government to allow firearms to be smuggled into Mexico. A program such as Operation Fast and Furious should never have been approved and must never happen again. There clearly was inadequate oversight that allowed American weapons to fall into the hands of violent Mexican criminals and drug cartel members.
Now we must focus on finding solutions to the problems facing communities on the border. That means taking firm and quick action against the cartels and stopping the flow of drugs and violence into our country.
It also means having a real discussion, with specifics, about how to stop cartel members from coming to my home state of Arizona to buy guns and then turning those guns on our courageous law enforcement and Border Patrol personnel. These brave men and women deserve sound policy decisions.
We must give first priority to protecting the lives of men such as Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry, who routinely make enormous sacrifices for our country. Agent Terry made the ultimate sacrifice. Nothing we can do going forward can bring him back. But he and his family deserve to know what happened and who is responsible.
To have this discussion, and to find these solutions, we must put partisanship aside and work together. Today’s vote to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in criminal contempt is in direct opposition to that goal and does nothing to further the investigation into Operation Fast and Furious.
Today’s vote to allow Congress to go to court to resolve this issue is warranted. The administration should share the requested documents with Congress and action in federal court is a prudent way to remove this critical law enforcement debate from the realm of politics.
Brian Terry and his family deserve better than a partisan fight based on election year politicking. They deserve answers to their questions about his death.
Just as I am disturbed by the application of executive privilege to withhold documents from Congress, I am equally disturbed that the 16-month investigation conducted by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform appeared to be a partisan undertaking, in which requests by minority members for witnesses and hearings were rejected. I am dedicated to working across party lines for solutions, not deepening partisan divides.
Congress must get to the bottom of what happened with Operation Fast and Furious.
Yes, unlike the Carmona campaign which has lightening speed communication and clear policy statements, Barber leaves us guessing.
It is interesting to note that Pima County Dem Chair Jeff Rogers (who recently said Heinz should drop out of the CD2 race) now criticizes Barber’s votes and favors Heinz– or at least that was the gist of his recent Facebook post.
Right. Holder murdered a federal agent. That would be the individual who fired the fatal shot, would it not? After all, doesn’t the NRA tell us that “guns don’t kill people, people do”? You can’t have it both ways.
The silence from the Barber camp on these two votes is both deafening and disturbing. I think all of us who are questioning his votes on these two matters would appreciate and benefit from hearing the reasoning behind them. The only voices out there now are those of the critics. Barber could assuage concerns if he simply explained why he cast these two votes. Absent explanations, the stage is set for further speculation, which can only weaken his position. I am still very much intending to vote for him over Heinz in August, but he needs to speak up and explain these two votes right away. Continued silence would be both ignorant and arrogant.
Holder is a murderer of a Federal Agent. It is too bad that you so called Americans cannot see the tragedy that occurred as result of Holder’s actions.
I share your sentiment, David, but I fear it may be a bit naive. This vote was carefully considered and politically calculated. It’s highly doubtful Ron thumbed his nose at Pelosi, Hoyer and Clyburn in order to act on principle. More likely, he and his handlers were concerned about negative fallout (probably with the NRA) and sought permission from the DCCC to cast this vote.
I agree, David. This blog summarily dismissed any challenge from the left to Congressman Barber. Perhaps the Green Party candidate was an amateur with a DIY campaign and clearly a political novice, but he was just as clear that he supported Barack Obama for president (going against his own party) when Barber wavered and that he, unlike Barber, favored Medicare for all, which most liberals find preferable to the Affordable Care Act although we’re glad that it was upheld.
Perhaps Arizona and the Tucson area in particular is so backward that in a non-minority-majority congressional district, only a “yellow dog”-type Democrat can be elected. If that’s so, then maybe this blog should just close up shop or its contributors who are able to can move to places which are more enlightened.
I’m glad Kelly is not in Congress, but is Barber really the best the Arizona Democrats have to offer?
I most heartily agree, Dave. I’m very glad you posted this so I won’t have to weigh in other than to applaud your post. I am not so generous to excuse this vote upon inexperience. It seems Rep. Barber is either pandering to the Right while he takes his Liberal support for granted OR he is merely voting his view. Either way, it should be a matter of grave concern to us all.
Agreed. Good post, Dave. We must hold Barber’s feet to the fire.
What Mr. Safier said. x10