Expect sparks to fly in the 31st district races | Rich Elfers

Watch for sparks to fly in the Cathy Dahlquist/Pam Roach state Senate battle. The campaign will be long, contentious and expensive. Adding to the interest is that both candidates are Republicans.

  • by
  • Wednesday, July 2, 2014 5:26pm
  • Opinion

Watch for sparks to fly in the Cathy Dahlquist/Pam Roach state Senate battle. The campaign will be long, contentious and expensive. Adding to the interest is that both candidates are Republicans.

Sen. Pam Roach, the incumbent, is working to be re-elected to her seventh four-year term. Cathy Dahlquist has been elected to two terms in the House of Representatives and is now challenging Roach.

Making this race even more intriguing is Independent Democrat Rep. Chris Hurst’s strong support of Dahlquist. He is adding his political capital to hers. Both believe it’s time for Pam Roach to go.  Hurst would have run against her, had not Dahlquist thrown her hat in the ring.

This Senate race pits two differing approaches.

Roach’s statement upon entering her bid for her seventh term was: “I want to continue my work to protect taxpayers, defend constitutional liberties and boost Washington’s economic recovery. The concerns of the people are my priorities.”

Dahlquist has a different take: “We have a lot of challenges. We can fix them, but only if we leave partisanship at the door…. We can have the best schools, a clean environment and quality health care for citizens, but only if we all work together.”

Roach’s approach is her vintage style. She is a seasoned political infighter who knows what has worked for her in the past and will repeat those same themes in this Senate race. Expect a lot of sound and fury from her.

The strategy of Dahlquist against Roach is to link forces with Hurst to show the voters that Republicans and Democrats can work together to bring about the needed changes to the state. It’s an unusual strategy, but in these times of political gridlock in the other Washington, it is one that many voters might appreciate and support.

Both Dahlquist and Roach are conservatives who have similar views on several issues.  The difference is that Sen. Roach has had difficulties dealing with her own party and was banned by her caucus from communicating with staff and from participating in the caucus up until 2012 when the Republicans needed her support to take control of the Senate.

My guess is that Dahlquist will use Roach’s status of being in the doghouse with her own party as a key wedge issue. Dahlquist will also point out her opponent’s difficulty dealing with legislative staff and her other “crazy behavior.”

Roach’s approach will probably be to dig dirt on Dahlquist. This was her successful tactic against her last opponent, Matt Richardson.

Expect this campaign to become very dirty on both sides. There will be a lot of mudslinging. Voters will need to put on their muck boots and hold their noses when they vote on Aug. 5 in the primary and again on Nov. 4 in the general election. Remember, in Washington state, it’s the top two candidates chosen in the primary that determine who will run in November.

Also, expect this campaign to be very expensive. Hurst suggested that Dahlquist’s campaign might cost upward of $1 million. Roach will be in the fight of her life and money will flow. Dahlquist is probably one of the toughest opponents Roach has faced.

Whatever happens in the four-plus months of this election cycle, a few things will be certain: Dahlquist will emphasize her ability to get along better with people both in her party and outside and Hurst will add his voice of support that it’s time for Roach to go. Roach will emphasize her long history of working for the people of the 31st District and point out her many accomplishments in nearly 24 years of Senate service.

The question before voters will be whether they want to continue to support Roach and her scrappy manner or do they want someone who is more collaborative and bipartisan?

More in Opinion

America is denying three hard truths

There are three major hard truths that our current government has been denying with great vigor: The Mueller Russia-U.S. Presidential election connection investigation, the war in Afghanistan, and the growing national deficit.

Promote the common good by ensuring individual liberty

Citizens following their passions and dreams improve the lot for all.

The three personas of President Trump

There’s Teleprompter Trump, Raw Meat Trump and Twitter Trump.

Carbon pricing won’t help environment, but will hurt taxpayers

How would a Washington carbon tax make a difference in the world “climate?”

It’s never enough

Based on numbers from the legislature, Enumclaw School District will be receiving huge funding increases from the state. Yet here we are with Enumclaw and a bunch of other districts telling the taxpayers, give us more, we need more.

Why are trailers allowed at Expo Center?

When my husband and I moved to our home in 2001 and for every year after the Expo Center grounds have always been pleasant to look at on your way to our home. No longer is this true.

Columnist sheds light on Koch brothers

Our economy, along with our political system, is broken and indeed destroying our democracy.

Vote ‘yes’ on replacement Education Programs levy

As a high school senior that has spent the entirety of my school life in Enumclaw, I know we have to take it upon ourselves to ensure the efficiency and inclusiveness of our school system.

Concern for common good is buried by greed

Tell big lies long and loudly enough and people will believe you.

Enumclaw boys, join the scouts

Troop 422 here in Enumclaw has taught me these things, and it has allowed me to be able to incorporate these things into my own life.

Concessions may be needed to enact carbon pricing

This is the sixth year Gov. Jay Inslee will try to convince lawmakers that the best means of fighting climate change is by making it more expensive to pollute.

Humility allows for tolerance of other’s opinions

Each of us has grown up in different circumstances. Each has been shaped by our life experiences. Each of us sees the world around us differently as a result. Why, then, should it be so difficult to understand that no two people will agree on every issue?