Last night, Mark and I had an opportunity to sit down with Deborah Kraus who is running for Congress in Ohio's 2nd District. Deb will be the first to admit that her run is a long shot, but she hopes that her run as the "other woman" in this race is enough to pull off a victory. Her bio can be found here, but here are the essentials:I am a 49 year old wife and mother. I have lived in Ohio all my life even though I was born in West Virginia. My maternal grandfather was a coal miner; my maternal grandmother was a teacher. My paternal grandparents were West Virginia farmers. I lived in Mansfield, Ohio until I was three years old. We then moved to Dayton where I lived until I was 22. I am the oldest of seven girls and no boys. Four of my sisters still live the Dayton area, with the other two living in Arizona and West Virginia.We had a pretty interesting conversation on the issues. Kraus is conservative, but there are a number of areas where it seems clear that she hasn't made a clear choice of position. Take the war in Iraq for instance:
I am a product of public education having attended and graduated from Belmont High School, where I met my husband Jon .We just celebrated our 30th wedding anniversary. We have two wonderful children, a son and a daughter. Both are married. Our son is living in the Cincinnati area and our daughter lives in Virginia about an hour outside of Washington DC.
Jon and I have lived in many different areas of Ohio in our 30 years together. We have lived as far north as Lima, as far east as Washington Courthouse, and of course as far south as the Cincinnati area. We have lived in places between the north and the south also, like Sidney and back in the suburbs of Dayton.
We currently live in Union Township, Clermont County, and have for almost 21 years. As Jon and I are both products of public education, our children attended West Clermont Schools and graduated from Glen Este High School. Our son graduated from the University of Akron and our daughter Marissa attended Mississippi State University.
Do I believe we should have started the war in Iraq? The answer is probably not. Do I think we should finish what we started? Absolutely, however we need to do it in the right way. We need to provide our troops with everything they need to be safe and successful, including armored vehicles, ammunition and body armor (which they do not have to provide for themselves). In our latest defense appropriations bill (HR 2863 singed into law December 2005), there appears to be more pork than real spending on defense, unless you consider killing weeds in New York that are killing flowers defense. If this latest defense bill is how things are done in D.C. , it is no wonder so many of our Representatives and Senators want to get out of Iraq; It is cutting into their weed killing money and other special interests. It is a shame that it has become as important to kill weeds as it has to protect our young people fighting in a war zone.You can put me down in the camp that says the Iraq war was vital to our War on Terror efforts. America and the world are safer with Saddam out of power. My impression of Kraus' position on whether or not we should have started the Iraq war is one wherein she doesn't want to offend anybody.
Her support of finishing the war in Iraq is unqualified, which is exactly the position someone representing the second district should have.
Unfortunately, Deb is relying on the liberal media to keep her informed on what the situation in Iraq really is. I can tell because she is implying that our troops don't have everything that they need to fight this war as safely as they can. The truth is that Marines are now saying they have too much armor and don't want what they have. There were some logistics problems early on in the war, but those problems appear to have been settled.
I agree completely with Deb on the presence of pork in the defense appropriation bill. That is a disgusting display of politics in a high profile and crucial piece of legislation. Kraus doesn't say what she'd do about these insertions, but it is clear that she hates them. So do I. I prescribe sunshine and lots of it.
Her issues page has a number of topics where it is quite apparent that Kraus has a good idea of what is wrong in Washington, but little evidence of what she would actually do to effect change if she were elected.
FINAL ANALYSIS: She's a little rough around the edges, but she is a decent alternative for voters who aren't thrilled with Schmidt's antics or McEwen's record.
4/2 Update
Bizzy chimes in with his thoughts here.Let me concur with Bizzy on the Anderson debate:
The two alternatives being floated to a Kraus appearance are, in my opinion, not helpful, and could actually be harmful even to those who think they will benefit. One option is to have challenger Bob McEwen have the night to himself, which will prevent a dialog on the issues facing the nation and the district, and lose an opportunity for both challengers to shine in a face-off. It appears from what she told us that Ms. Kraus believes that Mr. McEwen does not oppose her presence, but I want to make it clear that I am not certain of that. Of course, the McEwen camp knows how to reach me if they wish to officially comment on the desirability of a Kraus appearance.If the folks running this debate are to be taken seriously, they should invite Kraus to participate in the absence of Schmidt. Having some actress appear would not be productive. Even having made a big deal about asking the actress gives me the impression that these people are not serious about the issues facing the district and if I were Bob McEwen, I'd drop out because the event has the potential of being a circus and that won't help him come May 2.
The other alternative that is seriously being pursued is to have Saturday Night Live cast member Rachel Dratch, who satirized Jean Schmidt’s cut-and-run speech on the House floor in November in an SNL skit, attend in Schmidt’s place. While that has obvious entertainment value, it shuts out a willing challenger, and by doing so makes all who would be associated with it, including Bob McEwen, look less than serious about serving The Second District, and instead more interested in scoring “gotcha” points than in advancing a discussion of the issues. I fail to see how that helps McEwen or Kraus, and in fact believe it will make Jean Schmidt look like she made the right decision by not attending what from here appears likely to be perceived by many as a circus.
