Ogsbury defends his conservative credentials

Jim Ogsbury, lawyer, lobbyist and former congressional staffer, makes no bones about the fact that fiscal conservatism is the cornerstone of his campaign.

"That speaks directly to why I'm running," he said when asked whether the Democratic Congress was solely responsible for the ballooning federal budget, and, commensurately, the national debt. "It spans both parties - there's enough blame to go around."

Ogsbury is using his service as Staff Director to the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development as one of the key qualifications. He said that experience shaped his ideas, and disappointments, regarding the way Washington handles the national purse.

"It was a very heady and exciting time," said Ogsbury of the atmosphere on the Hill directly following the 1994 Republican Revolution. However, for Ogsbury and many others, excitement was overtaken by disillusionment.

"After a few years, the Republicans really lost their way," he said. "They really teed it up for the Democrats, who aren't at all shy about their proclivities toward overspending."

That is why, said Ogsbury, he is running to continue what he plays up as the most important of his professional accomplishments - reducing the size of, or altogether eliminating, a number of federal agencies.

But for some commentators in the Fifth District, fiscal conservatism isn't in and of itself enough to qualify as a "true conservative."

As Arizona Political Heat, which the Ogsbury campaign dubs a "pro-Schweikert" blog, stated:

"Ogsbury... has no pro-life record since he's spent most of his career as a lobbyist-lawyer, and inside sources say he is pro-choice. His campaign website is void of any mention of meaty conservative issues such as pro-life and the 2nd amendment. It only mentions fiscal issues. It's unfortunate that candidates aren't honest about these things. If you have to fool the voters in order to get elected, you're the wrong candidate."

In response, Ogsbury sought to clear up the issue, stating that he is "unequivocally pro-life."

On immigration as well, Ogsbury took the favored line.

"Our country is a nation of laws," he said, "and individuals who bypass those laws, regardless of their economic status, are subject to penalties. They should be treated as individuals who've violated the law, not special guests who are entitled to social benefits."

Ogsbury said his focus as a congressman would be securing the border.

"I'm not a big government conservative, but this is one of the federal government's responsibilities. It's not rocket science - it takes people and money to secure the border."

However, Ogsbury would not go as far as to advocate mass deportation, at least not at present. He said it wouldn't do much if there's a "porous" border, but even if the border were secured, Ogsbury did not commit to the idea that forcibly removing the estimated 12-20 million illegal immigrants in the country was the best route, saying the "nuances" of what should be done would have to be addressed after the border is secured.

He was more direct on Second Amendment rights:

"I'm pro-gun, baby," he said with a laugh. To Ogsbury, this means that while some restrictions may be necessary [on such things as keeping a bazooka or surface-to-air missile array in a private person's garage], "I draw the line very, very liberally - small 'l' - toward the right of individuals to own and bear arms." He said that in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller, the Second Amendment case currently before the U.S. Supreme Court, "I am confident the Supreme Court will rule in favor of the rights of gun owners."

Finally, on gay marriage, Ogsbury believes "marriage is properly constituted between a man and a woman."

Yet he does not believe it is proper for the federal government to assert that definition, and that, rather, it is a matter for the states.

"I am a strict constitutionalist," Ogsbury explained. "Article I is very limited in what it asks of Congress. That's the genius of our system."

When asked if he would support another anti-gay marriage proposal in Arizona along the lines of the one that was defeated in 2006, Ogsbury was noncommital.

"I'm really more focused on the federal stuff," he said.