by Mary Troyan , @orndorfftroyan –
(Photo: Pablo Martinez Monsivais, AP)
WASHINGTON — Sen. Rand Paul was a renegade political outsider before it was cool.
Kentucky’s junior senator arrived on the Washington scene six years ago with a message similar to one Donald Trump used to win the GOP presidential nomination: The country is run by a corrupt cabal and only a non-politician can make things right.
“We’ve come to take our government back,” Paul said after winning election to the Senate in 2010.
Such defiance – and a well-timed tea party surge – helped the ophthalmologist dispatch a primary rival favored by Kentucky Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell and crush Democrat Jack Conway in that year’s general election.
Now that Paul is running for a second term, voters have every reason to ask how much progress he’s made on that Election Night vow to “take our government back.”
If his presidential campaign is the sole yardstick, not much.
Paul slogged through a 10-month run for the White House that ended in February, one of 16 Republicans who became Trump roadkill. His average in national polling started at 10 percent and declined from there, despite predictions that he was uniquely equipped to blend conservative and libertarian principles into a winning combination. And his anti-Washington mantra was eclipsed by both Trump and Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas.
But in the Senate, Paul successfully carved out a niche as a fierce guardian of the small-government, liberty-loving, anti-interventionist wing of the Republican Party. He made his mark not so much by legislating but by consistently drawing attention to issues like privacy and constitutional order, forcing fellow senators to engage on them.
The most noteworthy example: his 13-hour filibuster in the spring of 2013 to delay John Brennan’s confirmation as director of the Central Intelligence Agency. Paul’s real target was President Barack Obama’s use of armed, unmanned aircraft to kill foreign terrorists abroad – and the possibility that U.S. citizens could be next.
“I have allowed the president to pick his political appointees, but I will not sit quietly and let him shred the Constitution,” Paul said. “I cannot sit at my desk quietly and let the president say that he will kill Americans on American soil who are not actively attacking a country.”
Cheered by liberals and like-minded conservatives, Paul made a splash nationally for his stamina and his soliloquy on civil liberties. “Stand with Rand” became a Paul trademark.
But the filibuster also drew condemnation from defense hawks. They labeled it a stunt that served only to make Americans more fearful of their own government during a U.S.-led global war on terrorism. Soon after, Sen. John McCain called Paul and two other members of Congress “wacko birds,” a remark for which he later apologized.
Another signature Paul issue – his demands that Congress grant permission to go to war – has enjoyed more staying power. There’s bipartisan agreement on Capitol Hill that previous military force authorizations approved by Congress are outdated and unsuited for the battle against the jihadist Islamic State.
But there’s strong disagreement what, if any, limits should be part of a new authorization. Paul wants a one-year expiration date and a geographic limitation to Iraq and Syria.
“There is too much eagerness for war,” he said in an interview this summer.
In the last six years, he’s objected to broad surveillance programs at the National Security Agency, tried to block certain arms sales to foreign governments, exposed government spending he considers wasteful, defended gun ownership rights, called for independent audits of the Federal Reserve, and taken his argument for criminal justice reform to historically black colleges and cities facing unrest over policing.
Even if his amendments never make it to the Senate floor or his bills never get a hearing or his filibusters never really block anything, his supporters say they’re willing to let Paul continue fighting for his causes.
“Government exists to protect its citizens and protect their rights, freedoms, liberty and privacy,” said Jim Waters, president of the Bluegrass Institute, a free-market think tank based in Lexington. “He may not have always succeeded in getting everything done that he has proposed legislatively, but it’s really an even bigger accomplishment to get the national debate started.”
Kentucky Democrats backing Lexington Mayor Jim Gray’s challenge to Paul in this year’s Senate race, however, question whether Paul’s national ambitions hamper his ability to meet the needs of his home state.
Paul’s allies say he did not view the Senate as a consolation prize compared to the White House. A few weeks before he dropped out of the presidential race, he penned an op-ed for the Lexington Herald-Leader reminding Kentuckians that he never abandoned his day job to hit the presidential campaign trail.
“I have done my job well, done it with Kentucky in mind, and done it exactly how I said I would do it,” Paul wrote in January.
In fact, Paul convinced the Kentucky Republican Party to change its rules to expressly allow him to run for president and re-election at the same time.
Unlike other senators who ran for president this year, Paul maintained his Senate presence and left the campaign trail frequently to return to Washington for key votes.
He dropped out of the presidential race with plenty of time left to cement his re-election chances, aiding McConnell’s bid to keep the Senate in GOP hands.
Paul’s more parochial Senate efforts include co-sponsoring the Freedom to Fish Act (which was signed into law) and placing a two-year moratorium on U.S. Army Corps of Engineers plans to block public access to the tailwaters along the Cumberland River in Kentucky and Tennessee. He also added language to a water policy law that prevents the collection of user fees at Lake Cumberland.
Paul’s relationship with the Trump phenomenon is nuanced. During a Comedy Central appearance in January, he called Trump a “delusional narcissist and an orange-faced windbag,” but he kept his pledge to support the winner of the GOP nomination fight. Perhaps the strongest arguments Paul made for the real estate mogul came in a series of tweets during the Sept. 26 debate between Trump and Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, in which Paul criticized Clinton on energy policy, war and criminal justice.
“How can Hillary say she is for jobs when she has stated she will put Kentucky coal miners out of business?” Paul tweeted.
His decision not to climb aboard the “never Trump” train will help Paul with Republican voters, now and in the future, said Bill Stone, president of the Louisville Plate Glass Co. and a Republican activist.
“The party will understand that Rand Paul is a conviction-driven Republican senator and a man of his word,” Stone said. “He’s not a child who, if he doesn’t get his way, takes his ball and goes home.”
Contact Mary Troyan at [email protected]
NEXT WEEK
A look at Democrat Jim Gray, the Lexington mayor who is challenging Rand Paul in this year’s Senate race.
