Video: Dan Greenberg Officially Announces His Candidacy for State Senate
Last Thursday, State Rep. Dan Greenberg made his candidacy officially, speaking to a crowd of around 50 supporters in the Saline County Republican building in downtown Benton. Greenberg is running for the open seat vacated by Sen. Shane Broadway and Greenberg had high praise for the current state senator.
“I don’t agree with Shane on everything,” said Greenberg. “But I don’t believe his views are the reason his is so widely respected around here. The reason Shane Broadway is so beloved by so many of us is because he is a hard worker and he is a good listener…I intend to preserve that tradition of public service in the State Senate.”
Greenberg highlighted his record as a justice of the peace and a state representative focusing heavily of conservative issues. He said that he was proud of the work he has done to help hold the state government accountable to the taxpayers and to be responsible with their money. He discussed his community involvement raising money for the Dorcas House, teaching classes without pay at UALR, and volunteering at the Christian Community Center in Benton.
Greenberg told the story of his son receiving a gift of the toy train for his birthday and refused to stop playing with it telling his dad he “needed to play with his train.” Greenberg offered this as a lesson to misconception some have of the role of government in their lives. “It is perfectly alright when a three year does not recognize the difference between our wants and our needs. But there is more reason for concern when we have state legislators who don’t really understand the difference between our wants and our needs.” Greenberg said that instead of promising to deliver government program to meet the wants of his supporters, he will promise to scrutinize state budgets and fight for limited government.
Greenberg will face former State Representative Jeremy Hutchinson in the Republican primary for the chance to take on either State Representative Dawn Creekmore or Little Rock attorney Todd Witham next November.
Tags: 2010 Candidates
November 8th, 2009 at 11:05 pm
I’m glad to see Dan is running. We need a true conservative in the Senate who has already been working to improve transparency and ethics in government.
November 9th, 2009 at 12:13 pm
Dan did a good job here. He has grown tremendously in office over the years.
His experience is worth keeping – indeed worth rewarding – with higher office.
Glad to see he has his focus on Saline County where so much of the vote is.
[He might want to check with the folks who Shane B. defeated before giving to much praise to the hard-core D, tho.]
November 9th, 2009 at 1:37 pm
Shane Broadway and I disagree on most things politically. However if you talk to people in Saline County one thing you’ll learn is he is a great politician. No one is more visible, more recognizable, and talks with average voters more in the county than Shane. That is why he receives so many Republican votes in his elections. All politicians from any party could do well to use his governing style as an example….though not his policy positions.
November 9th, 2009 at 2:09 pm
Dan is a great guy and will be a great senator. He was the only Republican lawmaker who opposed the party supporting the Constitutional Amendment to have yearly sessions. For that he gets my support.
November 9th, 2009 at 6:28 pm
W, get a clue ! Greenberg was one of 11 co-sponsors on a this Bill to have yearly sessions . 9 Repubs, 2 Dems. on Bill.
Check things out first before speaking.
Look at HJR 1004 at arkleg.state.ar.us
November 9th, 2009 at 11:18 pm
Facts,
While you may be right on the co-sponsors, if you would have taken the time to look at the votes you would notice that Dan voted against that bill.
November 9th, 2009 at 11:36 pm
At a Republican State Committee meeting he was the only Republican Lawmaker to stand up and say that he opposed the measure and he did vote against the bill. He was right that it was unneeded and a waste of taxpayer money. I think Facts should check things out before speaking.
November 10th, 2009 at 9:40 am
Im not saying yearly session are a good idea. 70 + percent of the voters said that.
Dan was for the Bill before he was against it? Sounds familiar.
I thought when your a co-sponsor ,that you have given the Bill some thought before you signed on…….
November 10th, 2009 at 11:39 am
Facts I would agree with you about the co-sponsor issue. it is not the first time i have run into that. Often they end up co sponsoring a bill before they know all the facts. What I was speaking of is that when the state committee voted to endorse the amendment he stood and spoke against the Republican Party supporting the amendment while all other Republican lawmakers in attendence supported it. I admire him for that and for voting against it in the end.
November 10th, 2009 at 9:43 pm
Dan is a great guy but that’s about it. I would like to someone who has proven to be effective get elected.
November 10th, 2009 at 10:28 pm
The vote is what counts, not the cosponsorship. Once you have a sponsor, it doesn’t matter how many cosponsors you have. Cosponsorships have no effect on a bill legislatively and are often done more out of friendship than anything else.
November 11th, 2009 at 9:49 am
Both Dan and Jeremy have been effective in different ways. Dan has been more effective in advancing a true conservative/reformist agenda. Jeremy has been more effective in getting lobbyists to buy him dinner.
November 11th, 2009 at 11:59 am
Both candidates in that race are top notch. I am glad that a good one is going to come out of that race regardless of who wins the primary. Then the winner runs against creekmore, who is probably the best democrat in the state. Why can’t all the races be like that?
November 13th, 2009 at 8:53 pm
Blue Meanie, Maybe Jeremy is more effective at getting lobbyists to take him to dinner because they actually want to go to dinner with him. I doubt Dan gets many dinner invitations from anyone, much less lobbyists – which hints at his greatest weakness as a politician – he can get no consensus because he doesn’t have the ability to build relationships with his colleagues.