Provided by Chris Forbush
“This is why I desire to run. I will give a sustained effort to undo, rollback, and block repugnant laws, bad policy, and federal overreach, and lend my support to my Senate colleagues in their efforts for the same.”
In 1976, two years before the U.S. Department of Education was created, a man won Utah’s U.S. Senate seat from an 18-year incumbent after one rhetorical repartee: “What do you call a senator who’s served in office for 18 years? You call him home.” That same man who began service in 1977 is now, 40 years later, the continuing incumbent of that same U.S. Senate seat.
So what do you call a senator who’s served in office for over 40 years? You can call him out, call him on the carpet, call him names, call him on a mission, or any number of other options. For me, I would like to call him up, with a lunch invitation, to both commend him for his years of service, and to ask if he would be willing to step aside and support me in a candidacy for his seat in the United State Senate in 2018.
My name is Chris Forbush, and I am officially announcing that I have created an exploratory committee in preparation for running, in the Republican Party, for the United States Senate. In the coming weeks I hope to meet with Mr. Hatch and complete my social media and internet presence in preparation for an official candidacy announcement.
A variety of reasons have inspired me to enter this race. Among them are not the reasons commonly repeated ad nauseum by politicians. Yes, “Washington is broken,” yes, people want “change,” yes, people want someone who will “get things done.” Nevertheless, for me it is something more.
“Getting things done in Washington” has been the siren’s song of every politician as far back as we can all remember. Sadly, it is precisely this idea that is unraveling the fabric of freedom and federalism in the United States. What a politician can manage to “get done” is often simply a measure of how much less free and more burdened he or she has made the lives of the people, and how much more constrained he or she has made the sovereignty of each state.