CONGRESSIONAL RACES 52ND DISTRICT : Primary Foes Aren’t Pressing Hunter on Check Scandal

When a six-term congressman is hip deep in Capitol Hill’s biggest scandal in years, Politics 101 would seem to dictate that his primary challengers should pummel him mercilessly over the affair--and then pummel him some more.

Surprisingly, however, the two Republicans attempting to wrest the GOP nomination away from Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Coronado) in the new 52nd Congressional District have made only passing reference to his major involvement in the House check-cashing scandal.

Over a 39-month period, Hunter wrote 407 overdrafts totaling $129,225--more than any other San Diego congressman--at the now-defunct House bank. While that presents a major strategic opening--perhaps the only opening--to Hunter’s two relatively unknown opponents, both have been reluctant to play what is perhaps the highest card in their political hand.

“It’s not a major issue to me,” said Ramona lawyer Robert Krysak. “Hunter didn’t do anything wrong. He just took advantage of something that had been a tradition in the House for 100 years.”

Similarly, Lakeside construction contractor Eric Epifano tells campaign audiences that he is “content to leave that in the hands of the special prosecutor and the voters.”

Those comments probably could not have been more charitable to Hunter if the congressman had scripted them himself. Hunter, however, professes to not be surprised by his opponents’ reticence.

“I think they realize, as I do, that the public is much more interested in issues such as the economy, keeping jobs in San Diego and border smuggling than (the bank scandal),” Hunter said. “Plus, my opponents’ main challenge is to let people know who they are and to lay out an alternative agenda. Simply attacking the incumbent doesn’t get you to the finish line.”

Hunter’s assessment, however, may be an overly optimistic one of a race widely viewed within political circles as a referendum on the so-called Rubbergate scandal. The relative weakness of Hunter’s GOP opponents, many argue, will cause their ballot totals to be seen primarily as protest votes against a Congress viewed as arrogant and badly out of step with average Americans suffering through a lingering recession.

Epifano and Krysak, moreover, stress that their rhetorical restraint should not be interpreted as meaning that they believe the check-cashing scandal will have no effect impact on the June 2 primary in the comfortably Republican 52nd District, where the GOP holds a 49%-36% voter registration edge.

“My attitude is that people have read and heard enough about it that I don’t have to hammer (Hunter) over the head with it,” said Krysak, a 35-year-old New York native in his second political race. “I think voters will see it as part of the whole malaise of Congress and will be looking for a change.”

The newly drawn 52nd District, which stretches from La Mesa east to the Arizona border, extending south from the San Pasqual Valley to the Mexican border, includes most of Hunter’s current 45th District. With redistricting having excluded his Coronado home from the new district, Hunter plans to sell the house and move into the 52nd District--even though congressman are not legally required to reside in their districts.

Three other candidates who are uncontested in their respective primaries also will appear on the June 2 ballot: Democrat Janet Gastil, Libertarian Joe Shea, and Peace and Freedom Party member Dennis Gretsinger.

For Hunter, who will turn 44 two days before the primary, the check-cashing scandal and the public’s growing anti-incumbent sentiment have produced the first dark clouds on a political horizon that has been largely sunny since his 1980 upset of nine-term Democratic Rep. Lionel Van Deerlin.

Over the past decade, Hunter, who became a lawyer after serving as an Army Ranger in Vietnam, has been consistently reelected by landslide 3-1 margins in his largely Republican district. Two years ago, the Democrats did not even bother to field a candidate, leaving Libertarian Shea as Hunter’s only token opposition.

Although he faces his first primary challenge since being elected to Congress, Hunter views the House bank scandal as only a minor bump on his path to a seventh two-year term. If that proves to be the case, it may have as much to do with his bold, politically risky response to the controversy as it does with his previously unblemished career and staunchly conservative voting record that resonates with his working-class constituents.

Contrary to the mea culpas offered by many other congressmen embroiled in the scandal, Hunter has taken an unapologetic tack since the controversy surfaced early this year, constantly repeating the line: “None of my checks ever bounced, and everyone got paid.”

Checks and folding table in tow, he sat outside the County Courthouse in El Cajon for three days in March, patiently explaining how the House bank provided overdraft protection to members, allowing them to write checks without sufficient funds in their accounts to cover them, with the gap to be filled by future paychecks. No taxpayer money, Hunter emphasized, was used to cover the overdrafts.

Allowing constituents to see the checks--in particular, proving that payees had received their money--had “a calming effect” on people, Hunter said, though he concedes that even some supporters initially questioned his approach.

Epifano and Krysak, however, hope that voters will be “bothered” by other facets of Hunter’s record--starting with his incumbency, an emotionally charged word in a political season being shaped by the public’s anti-Washington mood.

“We simply can’t afford to reelect incumbents this year,” said Epifano, who finished last in a five-candidate 1990 primary in another congressional district. “If we reelect them, that’s sending a terrible message--that it’s OK to bounce checks, to break the record for a single-year budget deficit, to behave however you want, and you’ll still keep your job.”

Although the National Taxpayers Union ranks Hunter as one of the 35 most conservative House members on economic matters, Epifano tells campaign audiences that Hunter still must share the blame for Congress’ “pitiful fiscal mismanagement.”

“Duncan Hunter has been there 12 years, and he’s given no indication that he’s going to be able to solve these problems and remove these inequities,” the 33-year-old Epifano said. “How much worse does it have to get before we say, ‘No more business as usual?’ ”

Similarly, Krysak, pointing to Hunter’s hundreds of thousands of dollars in special-interest campaign contributions over the years, portrays the incumbent as someone who has been co-opted, perhaps unwittingly, by the very system that he set out to change.

“I’m sure that Duncan Hunter went to Congress as wide-eyed and bushy-tailed as Eric and I are now,” said Krysak, who lost a 1981 race for a Yonkers, N.Y., City Council seat while in law school. “But he’s had to accommodate to the system. I want to show that you don’t have to be in the pocket of every special interest and spend a half-million dollars to get elected.”

Parrying Krysak’s criticism that his campaign finance reports “read like a Who’s Who of special interests” in the defense, aerospace and medical industries, Hunter argues that a most of his funds have come from individuals in his district or groups “with strong links” to the defense industry.

“They appreciate what I’ve done to keep jobs to the district, and my work on other issues, so I’m proud of their support,” Hunter said.

In his campaign appearances, Hunter speaks proudly of the defense buildup that occurred during the Reagan Administration in the 1980s.

Hunter also reminds listeners that the buildup meant “thousands of jobs and hundreds of millions of dollars” for San Diego’s economy. Although he acknowledges the inevitability of defense cutbacks, Hunter also pledges to “fight to keep as many jobs and facilities” as possible here.

Epifano and Krysak, meanwhile, share Hunter’s fiscal conservatism and position on many other issues. One of the few major philosophical distinctions among the candidates is on the volatile issue of abortion, with Hunter and Epifano being opponents and Krysak holding a pro-choice position.

That split, Krysak hopes, could give him a slight strategic edge in light of abortion rights advocates’ plans to include him in their mailers.

Krysak has built his campaign around his proposals for political reform, which includes calls for congressional term limits and campaign spending limits.

“We can’t begin to deal effectively with substantive issues until we change the environment in which those decisions are made,” said Krysak, who has refused to accept any contribution over $50.

Seizing an issue seen in many other congressional contests, Krysak also has proposed reducing Congress’ annual $125,100 salary to its 1989 level of $89,500--but Hunter already has gone him one better. To “establish a solidarity” with his constituents, Hunter recently began returning half of his $7,800 monthly take-home pay to the U.S. Treasury, pledging to do so until his district’s 8.9% unemployment rate drops by at least 2 percentage points. He did so in response to criticism about his role in the House check-cashing scandal.

Epifano, who identifies elimination of the federal budget deficit as his top priority, advocates a 3%-to-5% across-the-board spending cut for every governmental agency and program, with the exception of Social Security. To “set a long overdue example,” he would slash Congress’ own budget by a third.

“The only sector of our economy that is growing is government, and that’s insane,” Epifano said. “It’s time to admit that social services are a failed experiment. We need to dismantle the system and rebuild it. Tinkering with it is like trying to repair a car that’s ready for the junk yard.”

Both challengers concede that their admittedly slim upset chances are diminished by a three-candidate race that splits the anti-Hunter vote. Saying that “my heart sank when Eric filed,” Krysak acknowledged that the two tried to talk each other into withdrawing, but neither would budge.