Is Carly Conservative?

Carly Fiorina claims she is a conservative.

She gave a passionate statement during the September GOP primary debate excoriating Planned Parenthood. She received a ringing endorsement from former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin early in her 2010 Senate bid in California, which she ultimately lost to Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer.

But how conservative is Fiorina?

She staked out a position on the right in liberal California during her Senate run, but on some other issues, particularly the hot-button topic of immigration, Fiorina’s conservative credentials are suspect.

When Fiorina first threw her hat into the ring as a candidate for the U.S. Senate in California, she was such a blank slate that even her own campaign manager did not know where she stood on some issues.

Marty Wilson, who ran Fiorina’s 2010 campaign, recalled spending time going over Fiorina’s views issue by issue when he joined the campaign. With no experience in elective office and few statements in the public record, she perhaps could have made a beeline to the center as fellow executive-turned-politician Meg Whitman did that year in the California’s gubernatorial race.

Instead, Fiorina staked out positions well to the right of most voters in the liberal-leaning state. But Wilson said masking those positions was not an option.

“How do you?” he asked.

[lz_ndn video=29751411]

Wilson, who now is vice president for government affairs at the California Chamber of Commerce, said there was never any doubt during the campaign that Fiorina was a conservative.

“That was what she was,” he said. “I never met the woman, and I got hired to run her campaign.”

University of California at San Diego political science professor Thad Kousser said voters sensed that Fiorina was running on what she truly believed, even if a majority of them did not agree with her stances.

NumbersUSA, which lobbies for tighter immigration controls, gives Fiorina a D grade. 

“She didn’t run as this California Republican in the mold of an Arnold Schwarzenegger,” he said, referring to the actor-turned-governor. “That was part of this authenticity.”

Christian Grose, a political science professor at the University of Southern California, agreed.

“On a number of issues, she ran to the right of Whitman and probably to the right of the typical voter in California,” he said.

Related: Fiorina on Disney: ‘Shame on Them‘

During the campaign, Fiorina came out against abortion in most circumstances, opposed an assault weapons ban, supported nuclear energy and “clean” coal, opposed gay marriage and opposed “cap-and-trade” energy legislation to fight climate change. On immigration, she expressed support for a controversial law in Arizona cracking down on illegal immigration and called for cutting federal funds to so-called “sanctuary cities.”

That platform could offer reassurance to voters who like what Fiorina has been saying on the 2016 campaign trail but wonder how conservative she really is. On the other hand, there are enough actions and public statements made by Fiorina both during and before that campaign that could give those same voters pause.

Immigration Concerns
NumbersUSA, which lobbies for tighter immigration controls, gives Fiorina a D grade. That is only a notch higher than Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, who tried to negotiate comprehensive immigration reform as a member of the so-called “Gang of Eight,” and lower than the C-minus the group awards former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush.

Fiorina has endorsed a mandatory verification system to ensure that companies do not hire illegal immigrants. But she has made clear that the current E-Verify system does not qualify. Last month, she told CNN the United States does not have “a system that works; therefore, we can’t make it mandatory.”

She also has been a supporter of H-1B visas that allow companies to bring in temporary workers with critical skills.

She also has said she opposes mass deportation of illegal immigrants already in the country. And she rejects the idea that birthright citizenship can be changed without a constitutional amendment, even though some scholars disagree.

Fiorina told CNN in September that she opposes citizenship for people who came into the United States illegally. But she held the door open for green cards.

“They can earn a pathway to legal status under certain circumstances, so that they can work, but citizenship is a privilege to be earned,” she said.

As CEO of Hewlett-Packard, she laid off 30,000 workers and moved jobs overseas. She also has been a supporter of H-1B visas that allow companies to bring in temporary workers with critical skills.

“The Silicon Valley tech industry generally asks for larger-scale immigration, more access to foreign workers,” said Ira Mehlman, a spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform. “That is sort of the business milieu that she comes from. She talks about securing the border. Who doesn’t?”

Related: The Law that Changed Us

A super PAC promoting Fiorina, CARLY for America, raised $3.5 million in the first half of 2015. According to an analysis by the Center for Responsive Politics, the PAC has relied heavily on special interests traditionally aligned with the Republican Party. More than $1.5 million has come from people who work for business services. Organizations associated with Republican or conservative causes dropped another $500,000.

Real estate, securities and investment workers and groups and individuals associated with finance also rank high on the list. Those three categories combined accounted for a total of $418,000. Those three categories also were among the most generous givers to her campaign, which raised a total of $2.19 million through June.

By far, the super PAC’s largest benefactor has been Jerrold “Jerry” Perenchio, the former CEO of Univision, the largest Spanish-language TV channel in America. He also served as national co-chairman for John McCain’s presidential campaign in 2008. He has given $1.5 million to the PAC. His wife, Margaret, has chipped in another $25,000.

Other Issues 
Beyond immigration and trade, critics have sometimes accused Fiorina of not being a consistently conservative. Though she did not shy from the “pro-life” label during her Senate run, for instance, she allowed for rape and incest exceptions that absolutists on the issue reject.

Fiorina also told reporters during her three-way Senate primary race that she “probably” would have voted to confirm Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor, a liberal appointee of President Barack Obama. She said she “seemed qualified” and that “elections have consequences.”

Related: Carly 2010 v. Carly 2.0

Considering that several GOP candidates at the September GOP primary debate suggested that it was a mistake to confirm Chief Justice John Roberts, support for Sotomayor is unlikely to sit well with conservative primary voters.

On health care, Fiorina once backed a Heritage Foundation proposal that strikes many conservatives as suspiciously like Obamacare’s insurance mandate. The former would have required people to obtain catastrophic care. Fiorina has argued that it was markedly different and far less expensive than the mandate in the Affordable Care Act.

And while Fiorina mostly has supported Republicans with her campaign contributions, an analysis by the Center for Responsive Politics shows that some of her money has ended up with Democrats — at least indirectly.

In 2000, she contributed $5,000 to Technet PAC, which gave 47 percent of its contributions in federal races during that election cycle to Democrats.

As the Hewlett-Packard CEO, she contributed $25,000 to the company’s political action committee over the years. And that PAC has been bipartisan. It contributed between 39.1 percent and 45.4 percent of its contributions to Democrats during Fiorina’s tenure. That includes $5,000 that went to Boxer, Fiorina’s 2010 opponent.

And in 2000, she contributed $5,000 to Technet PAC, which gave 47 percent of its contributions in federal races during that election cycle to Democrats.

Wilson, the 2010 campaign manager, said he has no doubt Fiorina is a true conservative. And while California is tough terrain for any Republican in a statewide election, he said it was not the deciding factor in the race.

“Meg Whitman was certainly more moderate on social issues and spent more money and ran worse than Carly did,” he said.