A couple days back, I tossed some cold water on the notion that David Sunderland, the obvious front-runner for chair of the Vermont Republican Party, represents a new, “moderate” approach, even though he has the backing of the party’s figurehead of moderation, Lt. Gov. Phil Scott. I pointed out that, in terms of policy or ideology, Sunderland’s statement of candidacy could have easily come from the pen of “Angry Jack” Lindley or Randy Brock or Sunderland’s fellow Rutlander, Wendy Wilton.

Even so, in the initial round of stories about the race for VTGOP Chair, the notion of Sunderland as the “moderate” was dutifully repeated. No hint of a critical look at the idea.

Now, I’m just a humble blogger, sahib. My investigative assets are limited to (a) my spare time and (b) The Google. Most of our media’s archives are off-limits to outsiders unless you pay, and I don’t have a budget. So I’ve found very little information about Sunderland’s political past.

But look. David Sunderland spent five years in the state legislature. Somewhere in the dusty back offices of the Freeploid or Seven Days or the Mitchell Family Organ or VPR or WCAX or WPTZ*, there has got to be a ton of material about his campaigns, his political allegiances, and his voting record. God knows there are several reporters active today, who were covering the Golden Dome when Sunderland was in office (2003-2007).

*not VTDigger, because they didn’t exist back then.

So, I hope to hell that somebody’s been assigned to examine Sunderland’s political history and tell us exactly how “moderate” he really is. It wouldn’t be hard for a reporter with access to media and legislative archives, and I believe there’s a big story to tell. After all, unless Jack Lindley stages a truly remarkable recovery from his lengthy hospitalization, Sunderland is going to be the chair of the VTGOP in a couple weeks’ time.

Rutland isn’t exactly a fount of moderation, and I’ve been told that Sunderland is tight with the tiny but rabid pro-lifer community in Vermont. His recent public statements have been boilerplate conservative Republicanism: anti-tax, anti-health care reform, accusations that the “extreme left” has hijacked the state government. OTOH, I haven’t detected any sign of moderation in the man’s outlook.

My efforts at Googling his background didn’t produce much, but there was one little gem from the Seven Days archive:

Back in 2006, the Legislature approved House Bill 865, which added “gender identity and expression” as a protected category in the state’s anti-discrimination laws. After the bill was approved by a House committee on an 8-1 vote, it moved to the House floor. As Cathy Resmer reported:

Just one legislator, David Sunderland (R-Rutland Town), raised questions during the House floor debate; approved by a voice vote on Wednesday, March 1, the bill now moves on to the Senate — and, ultimately, a Republican governor.

(That would be Jim Douglas who, of course, vetoed the bill.)

Just to be clear, Sunderland wasn’t the only person to vote against H. 865, but he was the only one who “raised questions during… floor debate.” Not exactly a marker of moderation.

I’m sure there’s a much fuller story to be told about David Sunderland’s politics. And I’m sure I don’t have the time or resources to tell it.

So how about it, VTDigger or VPR or Freeploid or Mitchell Family Organ? Will somebody please do a little digging and tell us who this David Sunderland really is?