Elton Gallegly is currently the longest-serving member in the U.S. House of Representatives. For nearly three decades, he’s had a direct role in our country’s government, shaping policy, meeting world leaders, and introducing countless legislation. Some constituents in the 24th Congressional District view him as a champion for national security; others view him as a war hawk. No matter which way you look at it, Gallegly has had a long and eventful career.
As his retirement approaches—along with the election to fill his seat—the Sun decided to talk to Gallegly about his time in Congress and the impact his decisions have had on local, national, and international government.
You spend a lot of time living in your district, correct?
Every week. Every week for 26 years. I commute, I’m one of a couple of us. But most members come back once a month, maybe sometimes twice a month, some not that frequently. A lot of members just live in Washington, but I really felt that if you’re going to serve the people and be a representative, you need to be more in touch with the people and take the home’s message to Washington rather than occasionally coming home to take Washington’s message to home. It’s worked that way for 26 years and, other than the commute, I think it’s a great idea. … No one requires that you do it that way; it’s just the way that I think makes more sense to me.
I think some people really appreciate that you live in the district.
It helps being elected 13 times.
You’ve been in politics for more than three decades.
Right, something like that. In my wildest dreams, I never ever thought that I would be in any political role other than supporting candidates or voting in every election since I was 21 years old.
What made you decide to run for office?
It was actually kind of a funny story. I was a local businessman, and one day I woke up and realized that we had a city council at the time where—at least as it related to local business people—we had the tail wagging the dog. Staff was setting policies and running it, and I thought that the people who are elected should be making the decisions, and staff should be implementing those things. And I was a little critical one time in front of a group of people and, the next thing I knew, they dared me to run and I did. I never expected to be elected, and I was. That was 1979, after about 20 years in the private sector as a small businessman.
And you were the first directly elected mayor on the Simi Valley City Council.
Right. I was mayor for seven years and a council member for six months.
What made you decide to keep going with politics?
Like so many things, timing plays a major role. When I was first elected to the council, I really took it seriously, and that was more of a citizen representative. It wasn’t really a paid job—$350 a month, if I remember correctly, which didn’t quite pay for the gas. But I didn’t run for that purpose, and I still ran my business. If you enjoy what you’re doing and you have some success along the way, and you can actually see the results of your efforts in a short period of time—on the council, if you see that you need a stop sign somewhere or the roadway repaired, or you have some ordinances in the city that need to be modified for proper development—you can make it happen. I enjoyed every minute of being a mayor. Of course, I represented the city in Washington, D.C., on several occasions for things like our freeway and flood control issues, things that you deal with the federal government. I was always fascinated with the process, but [never thought] I would be a part of it. … Then [the congressional] seat opened and some of my same friends who were encouraging me to run for local election asked me to do it again, and it was at a point in my life where all my kids were almost grown. My baby was a senior in high school, so we were going to be empty nesters pretty soon, with four kids going off to college. And never thinking we were going to win, I ran, and that was 13 election cycles ago.
Currently, you’re serving as vice chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee and chair of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration Policy and Enforcement.
And I was the first chairman of the Subcommittee on International Terrorism and Nonproliferation right after 9/11. Right after 9/11 they created that. That was a challenging position. It was a very complex time in history. Now I just finished eight years as a member of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. Serving eight years on the intelligence committee was, probably of all the great things I think back on, I feel honored. Serving on the intelligence committee, that was the icing on the cake. It’s a very small committee that the speaker personally picks, and you’re in touch with everything that’s happening in the world. You’re at the highest level of top secret, daily, so it gave you a different perspective on the world.
Like when you met with Moammar Gadhafi in Libya in 2004?
There’s been a lot of fascinating things; I even pinch myself sometimes. It’s funny that you mention Gadhafi. I was just going through some papers, and I had a couple letters in the file that I was … going through. [I’m] getting everything organized because shutting down an office is not something you particularly do overnight, especially when you still have work to do. I ran across a couple very personal letters during that period of time. That was an interesting, interesting story. It deserves a story on its own sometime because we didn’t even know that we were going to have clearance to land in Tripoli until 10 minutes before we landed. It was the first time we had a U.S. military plane fly into Tripoli in 30-something years. To be the first one to step off the plane without knowing what to expect … that was pretty fascinating.
After having that experience and meeting Gadhafi in person, what was your reaction to the Libyan uprising that occurred?
I said, when that took place, “You ought be careful what you wish for.” You have to be careful the way you frame that, because Gadhafi was viewed, and rightfully so, as not the kind of guy that you’d want to go fishing with, with his reputation in the past. But the fact that you have to remember is that we did reestablish diplomatic relations with him, just like we had with [Hosni] Mubarak in Egypt. … And then NATO [was] in there supporting him, with the U.S. really being the principal support mechanism for NATO, and how we’re allowing this kind of a takeover. We do support the concept of democracy and freedom to express yourself—that’s what a free election’s all about—but, at the same time, you have to remember we’d been giving Mubarak $3 billion a year to run his country and then … anyway, it’s a very, very complicated situation. And then, at the same time, our administration is looking at a guy who is really a huge threat. Now, [Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad in Iran, we’re pretty much giving him as much time as he needs to do whatever he needs to do. Sometimes there seems to really be some conflict in the priorities of our government. Maybe that’s kind of a long answer to your question, “How did you feel about what happened?”
Contact Managing Editor Amy Asman at aasman@santamariasun.com.
This article appears in Mar 22-29, 2012.