District 4 state Senator Kathy Sgambati is a person of unquestionable competence. Immediately upon winning election she was recognized in Concord as a valuable resource on matters relating to Health and Human Services, a state department she essentially ran for years. And I believe the motives that guide her decision making in Concord are pure.
And that’s the problem. Kathy Sgambati simply does not share the values of the voters of Belknap County. She demonstrated as much this week when she, along with the rest of her Democratic colleagues, voted to redefine marriage in the Granite State … without ever having mentioned it on the campaign stump and without any real public input. Most disappointingly, Sen. Sgambati is apparently unwilling to come onto “Meet the New Press” on WEMJ 1490 AM to discuss her vote, which indicates a level of discomfort with even talking about this, the Democrats’ number one priority issue.
Sen. Sgambati is also the author of a measure to relax work requirements for welfare recipients. She would, in effect, extend the length of time people could collect welfare payments, even though we have the most robust jobs market in the state’s history.
Only 733 votes separated Kathy Sgambati and Jim Fitzgerald in the 2006 Senate race. We know that Jim lost primarily because of the high-level of state-at-home, non-voting Republicans that year. 2008 will be a presidential election year. Provided the Republicans nominate a reasonably competent presidential candidate, turnout in District 4 will likely be closer to what it was in 2004, the last presidential year. That means roughly 9,264 people (though, perhaps more) who did not vote in 2006 will vote in 2008. See my point? If Republican State Chairman Fergus Cullen recruits a solid candidate who can clear the primary field, and together they begin hammering on Sen. Sgambati’s “values gap” early and often, her seat will be highly vulnerable to Republican takeover.
Republicans are learning the painful way that elections have consequences. Democrats will learn that voting records have consequences, too.