Where they differ

We confronted a typically weird and comical moment in Arkansas politics the other day. But that’s redundant.

Presumptive Republican gubernatorial candidate Asa Hutchinson was accused of the ignominious disgrace of having supported someone in the Arkansas-despised Obama administration.

Presumptive Democratic gubernatorial candidate Mike Ross was pouncing to try to burden Hutchinson with a Barack Obama association, in large part by playing the right-wing gun card, usually a trump in Arkansas.

It caused me to wonder what the real difference is between these guys, and what difference it makes which one you vote for.

Not much. Public education policy, mostly.

-

———

Before I get to that, I must provide details on the weird and comical moment. It was SNL-worthy.

Television station KATV, Channel 7, in Little Rock came into receipt of a late-2008 letter that Hutchinson, a former drug enforcement administrator and an outgoing undersecretary of the Homeland Security Department, wrote endorsing … get this-Eric Holder, nominee of Obama for attorney general.

Hutchinson’s letter praised Holder for his prosecutorial background and for working cooperatively with congressional investigations when Hutchinson was in Congress and Holder was a deputy attorney general.

So now you know that, as attorney general, Holder has advocated reasonable gun restrictions that have caused the NRA, for whom Asa Hutchinson has done paid public advocacy for guns in schools, to despise him.

Holder also has urged states not to enforce their anti-gay-marriage laws-and Arkansas, of course, does not cotton to Adam and Steve.

So Hutchinson told Channel 7 that backing Holder was one of the greatest mistakes of his life, and that he not only now retracts that tragically misguided action, but calls on Holder to resign.

Ross was having none of that.

He put out a statement calling Hutchinson a “bureaucrat turned lobbyist” who said one thing in Washington and another in Arkansas, and who, by the way, “worked so aggressively to bring Eric Holder to power-one of the NRA’s biggest adversaries.”

You have to laugh. It’s not worth crying.

Working so aggressively, Ross said of Hutchinson. Writing a letter, you mean?

And Ross tried to smear Holder all over Hutchinson to imply some nonexistent breach between Hutchinson and the NRA, for whom Hutchinson has gone around the country advocating guns in school, just where firearms are most needed.

And Hutchinson not only disavows his former support for Holder, but beats himself up over it and wants Holder out of there yesterday.

Let me break down this comedy sketch:

Holder is a perfectly fine attorney general and Hutchinson owes no apology for writing a letter in support of his nomination.

Ross engages in a cynical political ploy to try to smear Hutchinson with the administration of Ross’ own party.

And neither of these anti-statesmen presuming to be our next governor will take anybody’s gun, or impede anybody’s right to purchase any form or carry that gun anywhere he darned well pleases.

If you want sane gun laws, then you need to move to another country.

So that brings me back to the search for real and practical differences between our competing anti-Obama demagogues-Hutchinson and Ross.

Hutchinson won’t like that I say this-and he’s welcome to call a news conference and categorically deny it-but I think both candidates would keep the private-option form of Medicaid expansion.

It’s working, and the savings to the state in basic Medicaid will be vital to balanced budgeting. Hutchinson talks about “reforms,” and Ross doesn’t, but that’s just blather.

Republican legislators trying to make the private option palatable will probably put some right-wing window dressing in the appropriation. It might be something about health savings accounts that no recipient will actually ever use.

But both candidates would go along with whatever it took to get to three-fourths votes.

Both candidates would cut income taxes a little, but not much, because the state can’t afford much. Hutchinson would pare his $100 million middle-class cut. Ross would impose a small opening increment of his $575 million rate reform.

They’d meet at $50 million, maybe, give or take.

Hutchinson will sign any anti-abortion bills that come out of the Jason Rapert evangelical church service conducted in concert with the General Assembly. Ross would veto the more unconstitutional ones, only because he wants to be like Mike Beebe. The Legislature would override.

Either way, the courts would throw ’em out, landing us in the same place. That leaves public education policy. Ross has the endorsement of the Arkansas Education Association and could be expected to favor traditional public education and resist-mainly through appointments to the Board of Education-the Walton-ization of our schools with charters and school choice and performance-based pay.

Hutchinson would be all-in for Walton-izing.

So there’s your choice-traditional public education with Ross or Walton-ized schools with Hutchinson.

The rest is comedy.

-

———◊-

———

John Brummett’s column appears regularly in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. Email him at jbrummett@arkansasonline.com. Read his blog at brummett.arkansasonline.com, or his @johnbrummett Twitter feed.