by John Plecnik
august 3, 2004
Rep. Sue Myrick of Charlotte, N.C., remains true to the values which swept conservatives into office during the 1994 Republican revolution. Sitting behind her desk in the Cannon House office building, Myrick needed little coaxing to outline the fundamental divide between Republicans and Democrats. "The biggest difference is the Democrats believe that government should run things and tell you what you can and can’t do with your money and with your life--they have a philosophy of bigger government," she asserted. "The Republicans have this philosophy of limited government--that you know how to spend your money better than the government does."
However, Myrick did more than simply toe the party line. as Chair of the Republican Study Committee, a coalition of more than 90 of the most conservative members in the House of Representatives, she was quick to note that dealing with the more liberal members of her own party was "always a challenge." "Within our Republican party, we’ve got people who run the spectrum from liberal to moderate to conservative," Myrick admitted. "Generally it’s us conservatives who are out there waving the flag for limited government, but because we have such a close margin in the House, we don’t always win those battles."
although frank criticism of political allies is a rarity on Capitol Hill, Myrick has already proven herself an exception to the rule. From last august, many might recall her oft-quoted speech at Belmont abbey College, when the congresswoman insisted that President Bush was "out of touch" on trade issues. according to Myrick, she felt very strongly that the President was not listening to her constituency--she felt very strongly that something needed to be done. "after I spoke out, pretty forcefully, things changed," stated an unabashed Myrick. "I don’t regret what I did at all."
Today, the congresswoman believes that the Bush administration has responded to her concerns and is heading in the right direction. Citing the administration’s use of the World Trade Organization to take stronger measures against India and China, Myrick asserts, "I’m comfortable with where they are, even though we have a lot more work to do." On a side note, Myrick praised the U.S. Secretary of Commerce, Don Evans, for working closely with her office and being "very, very good on [trade] issues."
Myrick exhibited similar directness when I posed the question that will likely face every national figure this election year: followed by Sen. John Kerry, you supported the use of force in Iraq. Since then, few weapons of mass destruction were found and there have been many american casualties. Kerry claims that if he knew then, what he knows now, he would not have voted for the war. With your current knowledge, would you have supported the war? Without mincing words or trying to divert responsibility, the congresswoman answered, "Yes." Calling Saddam Hussein a "total dictator," Myrick explained how her vote helped to remove a despot who "killed his people by the hundreds of thousands." alluding to our discovery of biological and chemical weapons, she also attacked the myth that no WMDs were found.
While Myrick claims to be "very encouraged" by the progress in Iraq, she admits that the nation’s conversion to democracy will not be easy. "Right now the Iraqi people are experiencing what it’s like to live under freedom. That’s a messy process. There is a lot of dissention from those who don’t want democracy in Iraq," ceded the congresswoman. "They are trying to thwart everything we do. It’s going to continue."
Coming from a strong military family, Myrick was emphatic and uncompromising about supporting our troops in Iraq. She rejected the politically nuanced position of Senators John Kerry and John Edwards--that one may support the troops and still vote against their continued funding. "If you vote against the funding, you aren’t supporting the troops," insisted Myrick. "Because the funding is what’s necessary to give them the equipment to protect them personally, to protect their regiments. If you don’t pay for that you aren’t protecting and supporting the troops."
While many remember Myrick as the Mayor of Charlotte, few recall the true story of how a young business leader was inspired to run for city council. When I inquired as to what issue had done the most to bring her into politics, Myrick described how she had a challenge with the city of Charlotte over a piece of property. She explained that the highest bidder was supposed to get the land. However, Myrick had heard "through the grapevine" that one city council member was going to say that her proposed office was not a good land use and argue a zoning issue. "It got my dander up and I went to a city council meeting," she recounted. "The result was we got the piece of property, but it made me really look at what [council members] were doing…and my kids and my husband said you can do that as good as they do; why don’t you run?"
From this humble beginning, Myrick grew to lead her country. Not one to dwell on past achievements, the congresswoman’s clout often went unnoticed by the beltway pundits. Even Myrick’s constituency is surprised by her growing influence. Preferring accomplishment over credit, the Charlotte Republican has risen to national stature under the radar.
Representing hundreds of thousands of North Carolinians, with at least a fifth of congress following her lead, Myrick has come to embody the fiscal conservative. Her political views are the subject of cable news, radio talk shows, and nationally syndicated columns. The congresswoman’s beliefs literally touch every house and home in america. To quote aBC News, "When Sue Myrick talks, the White House listens."
John T. Plecnik is a 20-year-old law student at Duke University and Executive Editor of The Devil’s advocate. as Policy advisor for the Duke Chapter, John authored the first-ever statewide platform for the North Carolina Federation of College Republicans.
Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Views are those of authors and not necessarily those of Canada Free Press. Content is Copyright 1997-2024 the individual authors. Site Copyright 1997-2024 Canada Free Press.Com Privacy Statement