The worst mental hiccups make the most cringe worthy moments in politics. Rick Perry couldn’t say what executive agencies he wanted to eliminate. Sarah Palin couldn’t bring the Bush doctrine to mind. And Gary Johnson couldn’t remember anything about Aleppo. (What’s a Leppo, anyway?)
Those are the classics, the fails that every candidate knows and hopes to avoid. But now Judge Roy Moore has become something of a walking talking cautionary tale.
Until recently the man who wants to be Alabama’s next senator didn’t know what DACA was, former President Barack Obama’s marquee immigration achievement. And perhaps more embarrassing, the front-runner in the special Alabama Senate primary also seems completely unaware of right-to-work laws.
After two failed bids for Alabama governor in 2006 and then 2010, Moore put together a presidential exploratory committee in 2011 and put his policy knowledge on display in Iowa. During an April meeting of the American Principles Project, the Judge was asked whether he’d support a national right-to-work law. He was stumped.
Moore: “National right-to-work? Explain … a little bit.”
Questioner: “Actually, Iowa’s is a hybrid right-to-work state, because we also have monopoly bargaining in the state and yet we call ourselves a right to work state.”
Moore: “I think right-to-work … you mean without public bargaining?”
Questioner: “You’re not compelled to join a union, you’re free to work.”
Moore: “Of course.”
At this point a more merciful interrogator came to Moore’s aide. “You have to understand,” the unidentified voice said, “he’s from the south. It’s like air down there right-to-work, they didn’t know there was any other way.” When given a second chance to talk about a basic issue that has dominated conservative policy for over half a century though, Moore whiffed. Again.
Questioner: “Would support, that was my question, if there was a national right-to-work bill you would support that, is that right?”
Moore: “I’d have no objection to that.”
Watch the full exchange below beginning at the 13:14 mark:
Granted, Alabama has had a right-to-work law on the books since 1953. And granted, the judge spent his time focusing on judicial, not political issues. But this issue is both near and dear to conservative hearts, and frequently in the news in the last seven years. When lobbed a softball, Moore didn’t just watch the third strike go by. He hemmed about unions “stopping some bad things” but then hawwed about public sector unions. It was the equivalent of dropping his bat, stepping out of the box, and walking out of the stadium.
The right-to-work issue isn’t wonky or obscure. More than half the country, 28 states in total, has passed these laws, ensuring that workers can clock-in and clock-out everyday even if they refuse to join a labor union. President Trump supports that, manufacturing businesses prefer it, and the Republican Party regularly includes it in their policy platform. In short, it’s the cornerstone of conservative labor policy.
Already congressional Republicans have introduced a national right-to-work bill this year, meaning that Moore might have to deliberate and debate the bill. But it’s not clear where exactly his head is at on the issue.
Since that awkward and garbled 2011 exchange, Moore hasn’t mentioned the issue much. He hasn’t talked about it on the campaign trail or written about it on his website. A Moore spokeswoman rejected multiple invitations for a phone interview, citing bad cell reception in “rural Alabama.” Subsequent requests for written comment went unanswered.
So three weeks ahead of the Sept. 26 Republican primary, which will all but officially decide who Alabama send to the Senate, it’s still unknown what Moore knows about conservative policy or when the judge will get around to learning about it. All we know are his Aleppo moments, first on DACA and now on right to work.
UPDATE: Shortly after publication, the Moore campaign issued a statement confirming that the he supports a national right-to-work law. “The most basic of human rights,” the judge said in an email, “is the right to enjoy the fruit of ones own labor without obstruction.”
Philip Wegmann is a commentary writer for the Washington Examiner.
