by Bhavesh Jinadra by CNB
Roanoke Times Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc. DATE: THURSDAY, January 7, 1993 TAG: 9301070436 SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A10 EDITION: METRO SOURCE: STEPHEN D. HANER DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
IS BUSINESS SUCCESS NOW A GOP LIABILITY?
AS BEST I can tell, Rich Lowry's complaints about Earle Williams come down to three basic points. In his long endorsement of former Congressman George Allen for governor (Commentary page, Jan. 3), Lowry said of Allen's rival Williams:Earle Williams is a businessman who spent most of his life building a very successful company, while George Allen was holding and running for various political offices.
That's right. Earle Williams has never run for office before. The entire purpose of his campaign is to bring a businesslike approach to state government, to apply the experiences of a successful business and civic career to public service.
This has got to be the first time a candidate for a Republican nomination was ever dismissed as unqualified because he was a success in business. Mr. Lowry sounds like a liberal Democrat, arguing that experience on the back benches in government is more important than success in the real world. That's not the Republican philosophy.
Even though he is a recognized fund-raiser for Republican causes and candidates, Earle Williams is "deaf to principle" because he has given a small percentage of his personal contributions to Democrats.
Mr. Lowry focuses on the money Earle has given to selected Democrats, which totals less than $20,000 over two decades. He ignores the almost $300,000 Earle has invested in Republican candidates and causes, including Allen. If Mr. Lowry can't see a clear partisan pattern in that, he must be blind. In 1991 alone, Earle Williams donated more than $20,000 to the Joint Republican Legislative Caucus and to its legal fund to fight the Democratic gerrymander.
While those few donations to Democrats obviously upset some of the more partisan Republicans in the nominating contest, they will mean nothing in the general election to follow.
Why, I remember Mr. Lowry's boss at National Review, William F. Buckley, endorsing a Democrat candidate for U.S. Senate, Joe Lieberman in Connecticut. I dare Mr. Lowry to call Buckley unprincipled!
Earle Williams supported the 1987 sales-tax increase for roads. He has supported other suggestions to raise money to relieve the transportation crisis in Northern Virginia and other parts of Virginia.
Allen's record is similar, although weaker. Lowry ignores the fact that Allen voted in 1987 for all the other tax increases proposed by Gov. Gerald Baliles. In fact, Allen sponsored his own package of higher transportation taxes, which would have cost the taxpayers more than $225 million annually (House Bill 9). In addition, Allen voted for eight straight, fat-laden, Democrat-written budgets and plenty of other tax increases, during his time in the House of Delegates.
When the Baliles transportation package was announced in 1987, it was quickly endorsed by five of the 10 GOP congressional district chairmen. Baliles skillfully took partisan politics out of the issue, and the package passed easily.
Mr. Lowry was right on one thing: Virginia Republicans don't need another lesson in how to lose an election. But some of us have learned from our past failures and are working hard for a candidate who truly breaks with precedent and can win - Earle E. Williams.
If, as Mr. Lowry states, "the overriding issue in Virginia will likely remain the economy," why not nominate a Republican candidate who has actually built a company with 4,500 employees and recruited other employers to Virginia, who has balanced a corporate budget, supervised thousands of employees and earned an honest profit?
In 1985 and 1989, we Republicans nominated lawyers with General Assembly experience against Mary Sue Terry and she beat them handily.
Only Earle Williams, with his political base in Northern Virginia, his long civic record of support for school reform and better transportation, and his recognized management experience paints a strong contrast with lawyer-politician Terry.