Are Mark Udall and Cory Gardner really two mean and nasty guys?
One might think so, based on the wrath they regularly hurl at one another via the Internet, television ads and social media in the course of their increasingly heated campaign for a US Senate seat from Colorado.
To hear Republican challenger Gardner tell it, Democratic incumbent Udall is a bleeding heart liberal, a reflexive opponent of big business, a foreign policy bumbler who virtually always walks “in lockstep” with President Obama.
To hear Udall tell it, Gardner is a fire-breathing Tea Party conservative, motivated by Christian fundamentalism and corporate greed, a “too extreme for Colorado” congressman whom women everywhere should fear.
The divisive climate of 21st century political gamesmanship being what it is, such hyperbole is not terribly surprising. But a more reasoned and balanced profile of both candidates suggests something less daunting than their respective propagandists would have you believe.
Both Udall and Gardner lean more toward the political center of their respective parties than the radical fringes. And in person, speaking recently to the Intermountain Jewish News, they both came across as affable and reasonable fellows, even — dare we say it? — capable of political compromise.
Interestingly, while leagues apart on many social and economic issues, on an issue of central concern to Jewish voters — Israel — their positions are virtually indistinguishable.
Both candidates spoke of their trips to Israel in warm tones, citing their travel there as a cornerstone of their commitment to the Jewish state.
Udall, 64, has served in the US Senate since Coloradans elected him in 2008, after spending five terms in Congress representing Colorado’s 2nd District.
A longtime resident of Boulder County, near Eldorado Springs, his quiet but unflappable style, and lean, tall stature sometimes makes him seem like a modern, and Western, Abraham Lincoln.
Udall touts his interest and experience in national security, energy issues, the economy and natural resources as personal hallmarks.
Gardner, 39, has represented Colorado’s 4th Congressional District since 2010, after five years in the Colorado state legislature.
He grew up on a family farm near Yuma, on Colorado’s eastern prairie, and worked in his family’s farm implement business. He is an intense speaker, almost edgy, and exudes youthful enthusiasm and energy.
Gardner likes to identify himself as a fiscal conservative, an advocate of lower taxes, a balanced budget and limited government.
The stakes in this contest are quite high, which goes a long way toward explaining the nature of the campaign. The final tally in November is likely to be close.
A Rasmussen poll of 750 Colorado voters in late June put the candidates at a virtual dead heat, with Udall drawing 43% and Gardner 42%, with 6% preferring some other candidate and 9% undecided.
At stake is nothing less than the majority of the US Senate.
With a current configuration of 53 Democrats, 45 Republicans and two Independents, the GOP is hoping mightily to turn the tables in 2014.
The Washington Post recently estimated that Republicans have a 77% chance of gaining the Senate majority this year.
A big part of the much-asked question of whether Colorado’s current blue might be shifting toward purple, or even red, will be answered by the final outcome of the Udall-Gardner campaign.
Following are excerpts of the candidates’ recent interviews.
That their comments differ on the kidnapping and murder of three Israeli teenagers is explained by the different dates of their interviews — Udall on June 25 and Gardner on July 2.
The longer space allotted to Gardner — devoted to domestic issues — is due to the fact that Udall was unable to spend as much time with the IJN as Gardner.
Senator Mark Udall
IJN: Is there, in your opinion, any reason to be optimistic about the prospects for a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians?
Udall: “I sit on the Armed Forces and Intelligence Committees and I’ve been really fortunate to be able to bring my experience to bear on so many of the issues facing our country and Israel.
“I’ve been to Israel and I always look forward to going back. Those experiences have certainly shaped my understanding of issues in the Middle East — and I want to underline this next comment — they have really reinforced my view that the US-Israeli alliance is unbreakable.
“I was disappointed to see the recent round of peace talks derailed earlier this year. We were all hoping that Secretary Kerry would get the parties to commit to an extension of peace talks in April. That’s not where we are today, obviously.
“Peace between the Israelis and Palestinians is in the interest of the United States and countries across the region. There’s no doubt of that point of view.”
What have President Obama and Secretary Kerry done right — or wrong — in the American pursuit of such an agreement?
“I think what they’ve done right is to stay engaged. What they’ve done right is to listen to the Israeli government and Israeli people. I think what they’ve done right is to hold the line on the necessity of any Palestinian government acknowledging the right of Israel not only to exist but to exist peacefully within and behind well-defined borders.”
Why won’t the Palestinians accept the idea of recognizing Israel as a Jewish state and why is it so important to the Israelis to have that acknowledgment?
“There’s a deep and fundamental principle that’s implicit in that point of view. That’s why I shared my concerns in a letter to the president earlier this year about the power-sharing agreement that the PA has undertaken with Hamas. I fear that the PA is setting back the peace process and undermining support for a Palestinian state.
“It’s clear that we also have to condition our financial assistance to Palestinians on their rejection of Hamas and terrorism.”
Are you optimistic or pessimistic that Western powers, including the US, will achieve satisfaction regarding Iran’s pursuit of a nuclear weapon?
“On a strategic scale we must take every action necessary to prevent Iran from possessing a nuclear weapon. To put it mildly, the threat presented to peace and stability by a nuclear-armed Iran is simply unacceptable. We can’t allow Iran to cross that line. We need to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, period.
“In that context, I want to give the talks between the P5-plus one and Iran a chance to work, but we’ve got to be absolutely certain that we continue to hold Iran’s feet to the fire. That means they’ve got to allow verification by the IAEA and must allow full access to any site deemed necessary by the international community.
“We can hope for a diplomatic solution, in sum, but we’ve got to keep all options on the table in the event that the talks fail. I’ve been clear about that from the moment I joined the Congress.”
In the event that these negotiations ultimately fail, what US action would be acceptable to you?
“We certainly would re-impose the limited sanctions. There are many sanctions still in place, and we have to be ready to slam new, even harsher, economic penalties on the regime if they fail to adhere to their commitments.
“We also can follow through on legislation I recently co-sponsored that would levy sanctions on international financial institutions that do business with Hezbollah. Those international financial institutions would have to choose between doing business with the United States or with Hezbollah. I’m going to push for the passage of that legislation.
“We also will continue to provide military and foreign aid to Israel. As the chair of the Strategic Forces Subcommittee, I added $175 million to the president’s budget request for Israeli missile defense. That makes sense intellectually, but it also connects to my last experience in Israel when I visited an Iron Dome battery in Ashkelon.
“I can tell you that the program worked and it saved lives. That’s why I increased the funding for the program this year as I have every year, since I took over as chairman.”
What are your feelings about unilateral Israeli military action against Iran in the event that Israel considers such action necessary?
“Israel will have to make its own decisions. We will have to make our own decisions, but as I said, all options have to be on the table, including the use of military force.”
(A closing remark)
“I just want to underline that we all stand unified with the families of the three Israeli boys that were kidnapped. It was a terrible act and we’re not going to tolerate those who would threaten innocents to advance their political agenda.”
Congressman Cory Gardner
IJN: Is there any reason to be optimistic about the pros-pects for a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians?
Gardner: “What is happening in the Middle East is one of the most significant crises of our time. It’s not just in the Middle East, what we’ve seen with Syria, Israel, Iran and Iraq, Afghanistan. It’s what we see in Nigeria, in Ukraine.
“We have to continue to work for the best interests of Israel, as defined and determined by Israel, for that peace. We cannot give up hope but must recognize that the times are more challenging than perhaps they have ever been, because of a disastrous US-led foreign policy.”
What have President Obama and Secretary Kerry done right — or wrong — in the American pursuit of such an agreement?
“The message that this administration has sent around the world has resulted in a viewpoint of the United States where our friends no longer trust us and our enemies no longer fear us.
“We have changed decades-old strategic alliances on the ground, overnight, and now our greatest allies don’t know where we stand. Our enemies don’t know who we are, where we are or what we will do when we say something.
“That is a dangerous position, not only for the US, but for our strongest allies, like Israel. This is the most pressing threat created by this administration. Mark Udall serves on the Intel Committee and the Armed Services Committee.
“He has been with this president every step of the way as they have changed the paradigm of what’s happening in the Middle East, in a very negative way — inconsistencies, taking positions that we don’t follow through on, drawing red lines with disappearing ink — and allowing people like Vladimir Putin to exercise what can only be taken as a takeover of Ukraine … with no pushback from the US to a significant degree.
“If you look at what is happening with the PA and their recent agreement with Hamas, the US should make it very clear that we will discontinue aid if they continue that governing agreement, as the law states.”
Are you optimistic or pessimistic that Western powers, including the US, will achieve satisfaction regarding Iran’s pursuit of a nuclear weapon?
“The US has risked making friends out of Iran when they have not lived up to their agreements. If they try to seek a delay or an extension, we will soon see that they have completely reneged on their agreements and obligations. It is our solemn obligation to prevent Iran from possessing the capability, the actuality, of nuclear weapons.
“I agree with Prime Minister Netanyahu that for Iran to remain a nuclear threat is a danger to the Middle East, the world and the US. The previous regimes in Iran have stated that they wish to annihilate the nation of Israel and I take them at their word.”
In the event that these negotiations ultimately fail, what US action would be acceptable to you?
“We want to have conversations not only with our Defense and State Departments but our better allies in the Middle East, and Israel. The US cannot act without the important direction of Israel. This is something where Israel’s self- determination, Israel’s ability to defend itself in the way it wishes, is something that we need to abide by.
“That’s why early on I supported the Kirk-Menendez legislation. We continue to use kid gloves to treat Iran and it’s not working.
“Certainly, we should intensify the sanctions around the investments and businesses that deal with Iran and [leave] nothing off the table. We cannot allow them to have a nuclear threat against Israel, the Middle East or the US.
“But the problem is nobody believes President Obama anymore. Nobody believes this administration’s foreign policy. What he said in Syria is a perfect example. One of the things that has frustrated me with Senator Udall’s leadership is his refusal to take positions, to challenge the administration on foreign policy.”
What are your feelings about unilateral Israeli military action against Iran in the event that Israel considers such action necessary?
“Israel understands the needs of the people and the nation and we will support Israel. Look, it’s time that Colorado has a senator who is a champion of Israel. I am fully committed to be that Colorado champion of Israel.”
Your opponent in this campaign has made your position on contraception a central issue. Could you clarify that position?
“This campaign is about economy, about health care, about energy, about the direction of our foreign policy. That’s what the people of Colorado care about. Senator Udall realizes that he has no economic policy to stand with, has failed foreign policy … so the only thing he’s left with is a divisive, social issues attack.
“Senator Udall has decided to spend millions of dollars in deceitful ads. I don’t oppose contraception. In fact, a few weeks ago we put forward an idea to depoliticize this issue, to take the politics out of birth control, by allowing common forms of oral contraception to be made available, over the counter, without a prescription.
“It’s very clear to me that Senator Udall does not want a solution. He wants a political weapon. Let’s not use women as a political weapon, let’s actually put forward good policy.”
Should Obamacare be improved or revised, or scuttled altogether?
“Senator Udall made three primary promises when the Affordable Care Act was passed. The first promise was if you like your health care plan you could keep it. It turned out to be the lie of the year.
“The second promise was if you like your doctor you could keep your doctor. That’s a lie as well.
“The third promise that Senator Udall made is that this would lower the cost of your health care. None of those promises are true.
“In fact, 335,000 Coloradans lost their health insurance, had their health plans canceled.
“Obamacare needs to be repealed and replaced with something that actually works to lower the cost of health care and increases the quality of care. There are almost 200 bills in the House of Representatives that would repeal or replace, in part or in whole, the Affordable Care Act.
“I firmly believe that we ought to cover people with pre-existing conditions. Why can’t we utilize health savings accounts to allow consumers greater flexibility in how they save and care for themselves? Why don’t we take advantage of malpractice reforms? That would lower the cost of health care. Telemedicine — those are all ideas that we can use to reduce costs.”
What are your feelings about the three kidnapped Israeli teenagers who were murdered?
“We put out a statement when the kidnappings occurred, calling on Hamas, the PA, anybody involved, to find out what happened, to investigate, to get to the bottom of this.
“As a father I can’t think of anything worse than losing your child, anything worse than knowing that there are enemies of Israel who don’t think twice about it, and [who are] enemies of freedom and our beliefs.”
“We have to realize – we being the United States, we being Israel, we being allies – that our enemies don’t respect our beliefs and they don’t respect our lives. Anything they do to prevent us from sharing space with them is a reflection of their hate for us. Israel has been and is a beacon of hope for the world.”
Copyright © 2014 by the Intermountain Jewish News
