http://theiowarepublican.com/2014/rand-paul-shows-weakness-in-announcing-re-election-bid-for-his-u-s-senate-race/On Monday, Kentucky U.S. Senator Rand Paul announced his intention to run for a second term in the United States Senate. Paul was elected to the Senate in 2010, but his meteoric rise to national prominence turned the first term Senator into a prospective 2016 presidential candidate as soon as Mitt Romney lost to President Obama in 2012.
There is just one slight problem for Paul – Kentucky law does not allow for one person to be on the ballot twice, meaning that he would have to pick between running for President in 2016 or running for a second term in the U.S. Senate. Paul, who is still actively pursuing a 2016 presidential run, is also trying to change the Kentucky law that could very well throw a wrench in his presidential plans according to CNN.
CNN reported on Tuesday that Kentucky’s May 17th primary day would pose the first challenge to Paul should he decide to run for president and for re-election to the Senate in the same year. With the Iowa caucuses slated to be later than they have been in years, it is possible that the Republican nominee won’t be determined before the Kentucky primary.
Needless to say, Paul’s presidential ambitions have created a mess for the Kentucky Senator. Paul, a staunch supporter of state’s rights, was recently asked by Salon how this situation should be handled. He stated, “I think making the playing field equal for people across the United States.” Paul went on to explain that the Constitution sets the requirements for eligibility for office, not the states. That’s true, but Kentucky’s state law does nothing to determine a candidate’s eligibility, it simply states that someone’s name can’t appear on the same ballot for two different offices.
The Kentucky law is similar to laws in other states, and most people don’t have a problem with them. I’m sure the Paul supporters in Iowa would have freaked out had Terry Branstad chose to run for Governor and U.S. Senator in 2014. Can you imagine the mess that would create in a state? The reason that laws like these are on the books is so that voters can choose who they want to represent them instead of a candidate choosing which office he prefers.
Paul’s legal problem isn’t some constitutional crisis. This is a crisis created by an ambitious politician who wants to have his cake and eat it too. Florida U.S. Senator Marco Rubio, who like Paul was also elected in 2010, would have to make a similar decision should he run for president in 2016. This is also why most Senators ultimately decide to run for president in years when they are not up for re-election.
When I saw the first article Monday night announcing that Paul was planning to seek re-election to his Senate seat, I viewed it as a sign of weakness. If Paul really believes that he’s a formidable presidential contender, he should have no problems walking away from his Senate seat to run for president. The fact that he is so insistent on making sure he will still have his Senate seat to fall back on does nothing to display confidence in his own presidential prospects.
To be honest, I would prefer Paul to stay in the U.S. Senate, and the same goes with Marco Rubio. After winning control of the Senate in November, holding control is going to be difficult in 2016. There are a lot of difficult states for Republicans to hold. There’s Ron Johnson in Wisconsin, Pat Toomey in Pennsylvania, Rob Portman in Ohio, and Kelly Ayotte in New Hampshire. If a Paul or Rubio chooses to run for President it just makes the Republicans’ job of holding the U.S. Senate that much more difficult.
I’m also not convinced that Rand Paul has the makings of a top tier presidential candidate. In a trip to Iowa earlier this year, Paul was hounded by the media in regards to inconsistencies between his current and past statements on critical issues. While Paul is treated like a rock star by some, his speaking style is lethargic and doesn’t have the gravitas that many expect from someone running for president.
While the recent articles about how the Kentucky law are giving Paul’s presidential plans fits, he also needs to worry about what a presidential campaign could do to his re-election campaign in Kentucky. Anyone who seeks his or her party’s nomination for president will come under intense scrutiny. Even though the campaign may be waged in states thousands of miles away from Kentucky, the voters there will still see and hear those criticisms. Running for president while seeking re-election to the Senate may seem like a good idea, but a candidate could easily find himself being attacked by a Democrat at home and a slew of Republicans on the road. That’s a recipe for disaster if you ask me.
I understand the predicament that Senator Paul finds himself in, but at age 51, it’s not like it’s 2016 or bust for him as far as a presidential run is concerned. In 2020, Paul will be four years into his second term in the U.S. Senate, and could run for president without having to give up his Senate seat. If a Republican wins the presidency in 2016, Paul could possibly run for the president in 2024, when he would be two years into a third term. In fact, the problem of being on the ballot for two offices won’t be a problem for Paul until 2028. Even then, he will only be 65 years old, hardly at the end of his political career so long as he stays in elected office.
Paul currently employs a number of Iowans, a clear sign to many that he’s serious about a presidential run in 2016. However, by announcing that he’s also focused on keeping his seat in the U.S. Senate he is basically telegraphing that he’s not all that confident of success if he does run for president in 2016. With that being the case, it probably makes more sense for Paul to focus on his work in the United States Senate and in his home state of Kentucky rather than Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina.
