January 23, 2008 09:45 pm
—
By Joe Hadsall
jhadsall@joplinglobe.com
Exactly how many questions were created when Gov. Matt Blunt announced he wouldn’t run for office again?
Try millions — one for each dollar sitting in a campaign fund-raising account.
Donors to Blunt’s 2008 campaign counted themselves among the most shocked by his sudden announcement Tuesday.
“I’m disappointed,” said Phil Hutchens, who donated the maximum amount of $1,275 through his business, Hutchens Construction of Cassville. “He’s a good man. I wish he would have chosen to run for another term.”
Glenn Brown, of Diamond, also gave Blunt $1,275 during the most recent reporting period. He, too, said he was disappointed.
“He had been doing a great job,” Brown said. “He brought lots of jobs back to the state, he took care of a major deficit and did a lot of other good things.”
Blunt did not provide new information about his decision during a news conference Wednesday. He said he was “absolutely at peace” with his decision and had no intention of resigning before the last day of his term.
Blunt said he plans to return much of the $4 million he has on hand in a campaign fund. About $2.3 million of the total must be refunded under a court ruling that cited that amount as exceeding state limits on contributions.
Joe Carroll, director of campaign finance for the Missouri Ethics Commission, said Blunt has several options for what he could do with the rest of the money.
“Missouri law states that he can give to another committee within the fund-raising limits,” Carroll said. “He could also give it to any charity, nonprofit group or civic organization.”
Blunt also could give money back to the donors, Carroll said. The money would be refunded in proportionate amounts to what a donor gave compared with the final total.
Carroll said Blunt could not convert the funds for his own personal use or use them to seek federal office.
“You can bring federal money to a state office, but you can’t take state money to a federal office,” he said. “That’s a federal prohibition, not ours.”
Brown said he made a donation to Blunt, not just the prospective Republican candidate for governor. He said he would need to know who the Republican candidate is before making another donation or designating his money for another candidate.
“I don’t know who those candidates are,” he said. “I’ll just have to wait and see who it is and what they stand for.”
Hutchens said he’s fine with Blunt giving the money to another candidate or refunding it.
“It was a donation,” he said. “It was made; it’s gone. If they send it back, fine, but I wouldn’t mind if it went to the Republican candidate.”
Timing
Blunt’s announcement came about a month before the filing period for statewide candidates and a week after his State of the State address, in which he touted his successes and detailed his goals for the upcoming year.
His agenda includes funding increases for public schools and higher education, provisions to limit illegal immigration, and more improvements to the Mo HealthNet and Insure Missouri programs.
Blunt said he did not think about dropping out of the race until after the address.
That leaves Democratic Attorney General Jay Nixon as the only major gubernatorial candidate. He created a campaign committee within months of Blunt being inaugurated in 2005.
What is the impact of the timing of Blunt’s announcement?
Annetta St. Clair, a political science professor at Missouri Southern State University in Joplin, said Blunt should have announced his intent before the State of the State address. But there is still plenty of time for Republicans to field a good candidate, she said.
“I can’t say that Republicans should be crying in a towel over this,” St. Clair said. “It’s not too late for the governor’s race in a state the size of Missouri.”
Missouri House Speaker Rod Jetton said Tuesday that Blunt is now a lame-duck governor. That may lead some legislators to rebel against some of his plans, but it also will give Blunt freedom to propose new ideas.
“The advantage is you can do anything you feel you need to do,” Jetton said. “It frees him up some.”
St. Clair said the Legislature is still firmly Republican, and Blunt still has enough votes on his side.
“The Legislature can run with the agenda on its own,” she said. “Plus, this is an election year. This isn’t going to be a year where the Legislature toughs it out.”
Blunt’s announcement is a mixed bag for Republicans, St. Clair said. Though the Republican candidate will be at a fund-raising disadvantage, Nixon is not a shoo-in, she said.
“Republicans might have a better chance now, because Blunt was not going to do well in the election (against Nixon),” she said. “Whether Nixon remains a strong candidate remains to be seen.”
St. Clair said Blunt’s departure could leave him open for federal office. He could be selected as a vice presidential running mate for Mitt Romney, or he could run for Congress should his father, Rep. Roy Blunt, decide to not run again.
“It’s not as if he is leaving Republicans in a lurch,” St. Clair said. “Though Missouri has only 11 electors, it’s not a bad state to pick up.”
Blunt is a member of Romney’s campaign effort. But state Sen. Gary Nodler, R-Joplin, said Tuesday that Blunt isn’t angling for a federal position.
“It’s possible that if that candidate is successful, the opportunity to serve might be presented,” Nodler said. “But he’s not angling for that. If he was, the safest shot would be for him to run for governor again.”
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Copyright © 1999-2008 cnhi, inc.