Over the course of her ten-year career in the U.S. House, Rep. Heather Wilson (R., N.M.) has always been a target. She’s weathered more than $20 million in opponents’ political spending to win six straight elections, four of them nail-biters (earning her the Bush-nickname “Landslide”). Watch Wilson in a debate, and any doubts about her political skills disappear. It was
just such a one-on-one contest in 2006 that proved the downfall of her favored Democrat opponent, Attorney General Patricia Madrid.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ADVERTISEMENT
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Depending on who you ask, Wilson is anything from conservatives’ powerful adversary to their ally in the race to replace the venerable retiring Sen. Pete Domenici (R). In the only competitive GOP Senate primary of 2008, Wilson faces conservative Rep. Steve Pearce (R., N.M.), the state’s other Republican representative. Whoever wins will be the underdog in a race against liberal Rep. Tom Udall (D., N.M.), who with $2.6 million has more than twice as much cash on hand as either Republican.
“Adversary” may overstate the case.
She more resembles the center-right Kay Bailey Hutchison (R., Texas) than the liberal Olympia Snowe (R., Maine). Like Pearce, she receives an “A” from the National Rifle Association. She cannot compete with Pearce’s perfect pro-life record, but she has voted about 80 percent pro-life over her career.
Yet “ally” isn’t quite right either; without question, Pearce is the true conservative in the June 3 primary. He has received the endorsement of the Club for Growth, National Right to Life, and the Susan B. Anthony List. His lifetime rating with the American Conservative Union (94) is substantially higher than Wilson’s (80), and in recent years the difference has been much more pronounced. Wilson
scored just 67 in 2006, with deductions for votes on immigration enforcement, federal funding for destructive embryonic research, and the House conservatives’ budget.
Her “RePork Card” score is 10 percent, whereas Pearce’s is 80 percent.
“From a conservative standpoint, Pearce is far and away the better candidate,” said Paul Gessing, a former Washington activist who now heads the non-partisan Rio Grande Foundation in Albuquerque. “It’s tough to say who would be able to beat Udall.”
Not all New Mexican Republicans express such uncertainty about the November contest. “Pearce is a great guy — he votes the way we like him to vote,” said Corky Morris, one of the state’s Republican old guard and an old fundraiser and close acquaintance of Ronald Reagan. “But I really think that Heather runs better against Udall.” State Senate Minority Leader Stuart Ingle (R) expressed a similar sentiment.
So did state senator Rod Adair (R): “I have not formally endorsed anybody, but I don’t think there’s much question that the only Republican who can beat Udall is Heather Wilson.”
Pearce’s spokesman, Brian Phillips, dismisses such talk. Pearce, he said, already holds down a district that is 60 percent Democratic in voter registration, and he will score well in the rural parts of Udall’s current congressional district, once the Democrat’s very liberal (lifetime ACU rating: 4 percent) record is laid bare in a contested general election. “Udall has high name-recognition,” said Phillips. “It makes sense that he would be up early on.”
