Republicans– Get Right or Get Out
A recognizable pattern is emerging in Republican Party behavior, and it’s not pretty. Cannibalism might be a fair characterization to describe the goings on in Republican circles, both inside Congressional halls and in the country at large. It appears that a major battle has been initiated by right-wing conservatives for control of the party. The ultimate goal is to create a society characterized by limited government, individual liberty and Biblical morality. The conservative Republicans maintain such a society was envisioned by the Founders, and thus its re-establishment is a desirable goal. In the fight for control of the party, moderate and liberal Republican influence is being eliminated, often ruthlessly.
ORIGINS OF THE FIGHT FOR CONTROL OF REPUBLICAN PARTY
It appears that the genesis for the current movement to purify the Republican Party can be traced back just a few years. In late 1995, one conservative observer thought he sensed the eventual demise of the Democratic Party and expected that the liberals and moderates in the Republican Party would take up the issues previously championed by the Democrats, such as the promotion of gun control and abortion rights issues. This, of course, would lead to a major rift amongst Republicans. This seer assumed that conservatives would emerge as the winners in the struggle for control of the Republican Party, regardless of the short-term consequences of such a struggle.
It is assumed that transition to a right-wing conservative Republican Party can be readily achieved. The reason this is so is that the conservatives feel that they are more experienced at building support from the grass roots level than is the moderate wing of the party. Further, the conservative wing is more highly skilled in the use of the information highway and will use it to their advantage. In the ultra-conservative view, this means that they could quickly rebuild the party in a purified form, and thus would be better off without unneeded moderate baggage to impede their march toward the restoration of the Republic that was envisioned at the birth of the nation (or their interpretation of that vision), and particularly before FDR’s New Deal revolution.
CONSERVATIVES GAIN IMPETUS
Surprising wins by conservative Republicans, not only over Democrats, but also over moderates in their own party, gave conservatives a new impetus in the 2000 election cycle. Victories by conservatives in New Jersey and Virginia primaries stunned the GOP establishment, which then recovered and fully supported their conservative brethren.
Earlier wins by New York Mayor Rudolph Guilani who, while not a social conservative, made it a point not to alienate the Christian right, and by Virginia Governor Jim Gilmore, a solid Christian conservative, indicate to some observers that a twenty-year trend toward the right is taking a serious hold on American, and particularly Republican, thinking.1
STRATEGY
While this brief snapshot of conservative Republican victories can hardly be characterized as a tsunami that is ready to overwhelm overall Republican or American thinking, it has apparently convinced the conservative Christian Right that it can ride a wave of its own making on its way to restoring a limited government, pre-New Deal country.
According to an authority who offers guidelines on election tactics for use by Republican activists, however, the rightward momentum can only be maintained if a page is taken from the victories of recent years. New ideas, concepts and images, such as Newt Gingrich’s Contract with America, which was initially so successful, must be further developed to ensure that the electorate’s attention is engaged and its enthusiasm is harnessed. Another valuable lesson from the Gingrich years was that support for the party, rather than for individual candidates, will achieve excellent results in the long run.
Engaging people at the local level is another key to long-term election successes. For example, beyond simply monitoring their children’s educational progress, parents can be recruited to prepare report cards on the schools’ performance. These reports will then provide valuable campaign ammunition to school board candidates whose views and values are attuned to their own.
By thus keeping people engaged with new ideas – right ideas -- and keeping them activated, the goal of limited government can be achieved, according to this strategy.
BUMPS IN THE ROAD TAKEN IN STRIDE
Of course, the road to conservative victory will not be without its setbacks, as evidenced by numerous Republican defeats, particularly those who were supported by conservative groups in the 1998 electoral cycle. This was taken in stride, however, and the right wing insisted on continuing to push its agenda.
CLEAN HOUSE
In fact, conservatives see an opportunity to “improve the gene pool,” by ridding the party of moderates, going so far as attempting to decertify moderates who choose to ignore the more conservative planks in the Republican platform – even after they had garnered their party’s nomination!
To purists, there is no room for compromise when it comes to issues of principle, so electoral losses by moderate Republicans are not seen as serious setbacks. Instead, they are seen as opportunities for their replacement by true believers.
GET RIGHT OR DIE
For that matter, the moderate wing of the party is seen as nothing more than RINOs – Republicans in Name Only – and their loss is not seen as a bad thing. According to this line of thinking, moderates’ abandonment of the conservative planks in the platform will only result in the defeat of the party itself.
Moderates are forcefully reminded that by forgetting Newt Gingrich’s tactics, which brought huge electoral victories, Congress is now split down the middle, instead of being overwhelmingly Republican as it was during the mid-1990s.
Besides re-educating their own Republican Party members who have gone astray, conservatives feel that they need to convey to the nation that the Democrats are imposing an alien agenda on the country -- the all-powerful state, a collapsing legal system, and the idea that personal morality doesn’t really matter. The difference between right and wrong does matter; the upholding of solid conservative principles cannot be flexed to suit various purposes. To set things right, Republicans should “adopt a political strategy designed to fight and win the second American Civil War.”
Providing the message is successfully communicated, the thinking is that the Democrats will eventually fade away (as earlier predicted), and the Republicans will split into two new parties – the Conservative Party and the New (presumably less conservative) Republican Party. While the strategy is acknowledged as risky – it could even fail – the ultimate reward will make the effort worthwhile.
MODERATES’ COMFORT IS NOT THE GOAL
Although not all Republicans are happy about the direction that the conservatives want to take the party, it apparently doesn’t matter to the right wing establishment. They are very willing to continue their machinations of mass disruption because they appear to be sure that they will triumph in the end.
It may not be generally well-known, but even the Utah legislature’s LDS branch of the GOP can’t go along with many of the conservatives’ positions. Areas of disagreement include -- surprise – abortion (under no circumstance vs. allowances in some cases), public education (seen in a favorable light in Utah), gun control (Conservatives: no restrictions to the right to pack heat, while the LDS legislature maintains that there is no sensible reason for allowing guns in schools!).15 It appears, however, that the Utah GOP isn’t ready to air these differences in public. Now is not the time to fight out these issues – they can wait.
CRY FOR HELP
Meanwhile, several moderate House Republicans with seats considered to be vulnerable in the 2000 election cried for help from their leadership. A highly conservative political action committee, The Club for Growth, planned to pump $100,000 to $200,000 into a rival Republican’s campaign who was running against the sitting house member, Rep. Marge Roukema, (R-N.J.), because she was deemed to be unacceptably moderate. Moderate Rep. Sherwood Boehlert (R-N.Y.) was another sitting House Republican who thought he would also be targeted by the Club for Growth.
Cato Institute economist Stephen Moore, who heads the Club for Growth, maintained that the Club’s position was perfectly justifiable. If sitting officeholders don’t meet the Club’s criteria for good governance, they shouldn’t be given a free pass in primary elections. Besides looking for Republican candidates of its choice to challenge Republican moderates, the Club was said to be planning to sink as much as $4 million in the fall elections against liberal Democrats.
The attempts at ousting them in favor of more conservative Republicans have upset moderate House members enough to cause them to cry for help from their leadership. Not sensing enough leadership support, some have even threatened a revolt by cutting their ties to the National Congressional Committee, refusing to pay their annual dues and boycotting the NRCC dinner which was expected to raise as much as $7 million for the party in 2000.
Altogether, ten moderate Republican house members were targeted for ousting in favor of conservative Republicans in the 2000 primaries. In addition to targeting one moderate incumbent house member in the 2002 primaries, The Club for Growth has a goal of raising $5 million with the aim of knocking out other, unspecified moderate Republicans in the primary election cycle (see inset, following).
In the meantime, House leaders Dick Armey and Tom DeLay found themselves having to deny that they were behind a secret plan to knock off moderates. Early in the 2000 campaign, Armey felt he had to assure a closed-door meeting of Republicans that each member of the GOP conference is just as important as any other.
The situation has become so serious that the leadership had to do everything in its power to let The Club for Growth know that it could “single-handedly be guilty of turning the House over to the Democrats.” Club founder Stephen Moore, however, stated that the Club for Growth had no intention of backing off from its efforts to replace moderate with conservative Republicans.
In fact, the Club for Growth (www.clubforgrowth.org) realized that it could develop much greater political clout by bundling individual contributions to candidates, thus getting more bang for its buck. Channeling large sums through the Club sends a far more convincing message, both to its adversaries and to its friends, than individual contributions can hope to convey.
As the Club demonstrates the impact that large sums can make, it expects to continue to develop and expand on this technique of multiplying relatively small sums into large ones.
This bundling technique has the further advantage of enabling the organization to make unlimited contributions without the need for reporting the sources of the funds or where they are being spent, while satisfying the Internal Revenue Service code (527) that covers the operation.
NASTINESS SERVES A USEFUL PURPOSE
To put a coda to this message, the Club for Growth bestowed its first-ever RINO (Republican in Name Only) awards early in 2002. Such shenanigans may be dismissed by moderates, and be only slightly embarrassing to the Republican party as a whole, but the awards are expected to provide the kind of publicity that the Club for Growth seeks in its efforts to further its cause. Besides providing a titter at the grassroots level, RINO awards can serve as additional leverage to pressure moderates to adhere to the party’s core principles. The awards also serve as reminders to moderates that their constituents are made aware of their failure to do so.
WHAT’S NEXT?
Regardless of the reception to their pressure tactics, or temporary setbacks suffered as a result of their extreme efforts, many key conservatives in the party are very willing to continue their drive toward “improving the Republican gene pool” by making the moderates among them shape up, or be replaced. This drive will continue on course until it succeeds or it results in a new break-away conservative party, which they are confident can be rebuilt in a purified form – either way, they can’t lose.
REPUBLICANS TARGETED FOR OUSTER BY REPUBLICANS
Attempts at ousting Moderate Republicans in favor of Conservative Republicans
Rep. Wayne Gilchrist, R-Md. 2002
Rep. Marge Roukema, R-N.J. 2000
Rep. Dick Zimmer, R-N.J. 2000
Rep. Sherwood Boehlert, R-N.Y. 2000
Rep. Thomas Davis, R-Va. 2000
Rep. James Greenwood, R-Pa. 2000
Rep. Jack Quin, R-N.Y. 2000
Rep. Greg Ganske, R-Iowa 2000
Rep. Jim Kolbe, R-Ariz. 2000
Rep. Mike Castle, R.Del. 2000
Rep. Connie Morella, R-Md. 2000
Sources:
Eilperin, Juliet, “GOP Moderates Ask Leaders to Help End Attacks From Right” – see bibliography
Bresnahan, John; Crabtree, Susan, “Moderates Fume at GOP Leaders –
Roukema Race Helps Spark Talk of Revolt,” – see bibliography
Waller, Douglas, When Republicans Attack Republicans – see bibliography
RINO – REPUBLICANS IN NAME ONLY -- AWARD “WINNERS” 2002
Dubious Honors Bestowed by The Club for Growth
Gov. Don Sundquist, R-Tenn RINO of the Year
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz Honorable Mention
Rep. Greg Ganske, R-Iowa Honorable Mention
Source:
Eilperin, Juliet, “Conservative Group Picks Republicans for Dubious Honor” -- see bibliography
QUOTES OF INTERESTRep Greg Ganske (R-Iowa) is cited as the “… best Republican friend (that House Democratic Leader Dick Gebhardt has) in Congress” by The Club for Growth at its first annual RINO – Republican in Name Only – awards in 2002. Ganske earned the distinction for his support for managed care reform as well as the federalization of airport security screeners. (Eilperin, 2002)
Senator John McCain is said to be “a surprise recruit in the Democrats’ class warfare attack squad” by The Club for Growth at the same function for his support of the same airport security and health care bills, as well as his opposition to President Bush’s tax cut plan. (Eilperin, 2002)
“The next step is to do away with the primary and have a closed primary process whereby all the candidates are selected by caucuses.” Delegate Bill Boden, Houston Republican, in response to conservative Robert X. Johnson’s proposal at the 2002 Texas Republican Party convention to oust previously-elected candidates who were found to have violated the Texas Republican Party’s core principles, and replaced by a majority vote of state convention delegates. (Fleck, 2002)
“We can’t have this infighting between conservatives and moderates and maintain a majority.” House Majority Whip Tom Delay, in response to the conservative Club for Growth’s plans to raise $100,000 to $200,000 in an effort to upset a sitting house Republican House member in the 2000 New Jersey primary in favor of a conservative candidate of its choice. (Eilperin, 2000)
“…nobody from the leadership has endorsed any opponent of any incumbent.” Tony Rudy, Tom Delay’s deputy chief of staff, in response to allegations that the House leadership were behind an effort to oust centrist lawmakers in favor of more conservative Republicans. (Bresnahan, Crabtree, 2000)
BIBLIOGRAPHYREPUBLICANS – GET RIGHT OR GET OUT
1. Martin, Rod, “Moderate” Republicans Beware,” Covenant Syndicate Vol 1, No. 63, http://capo.org/opeds/modgop.html, downloaded 27 Sep 2002
2. McGehee, Kevin, “Fasten Your Seat-Belts, Republicans,” Port of Call Intertel Region VII Newsletter, Oct/Nov 1995, http://www.hevanet.com/kort/REPUBL1.HTM, downloaded 16 Oct 2002
3. Vulliamy, Ed, “Cabal of lawyers drives Bush further to right,” The Observer, 29 April 2001, http://www.observer.co.uk/Print/0,3858,4177480,00.html, downloaded 17 Oct 2002
4. Brennan, Mary C., “Turning Right in the Sixties,” University of North Carolina Press, 1995, http://www.ibiblio.org/uncpress/chapters/brennan_turning.html, downloaded 18 Sep 2002
5. Limbacher, Carl, “Conservative Victories Stun GOP Establishment.” NewsMax.com, 29 June 2001, http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3b3cec1b59ac.htm, downloaded 16 Oct 2002
6. Garecht, Joe, “Create Political Momentum by Inventing Something New,” Local Victory Newsletter, 6 March 2002, http://localvictory.com/Articles/political_momentum.html, Downloaded 16 Oct 2002
7. Ivers, Kevin, “Election 1998 Analysis: A Story of Two Republican Parties -- Which One Will Take Control?” 04 Nov 1998, http://www.lcrga.com/archive/98110401.shtml, downloaded 22 Oct 20028.
8. Anon, “Voters Reject Religious Right’s Narrow Agenda” The Light, Newsletter of the Interfaith Alliance, Winter 1998, http://www.interfaithalliance.org/Newsroom/Narchive/light_1298_vrrrna.html, downloaded 17 Oct 2002
9. Fleck, Tim, “Elephants vs RINOS: Party veterans sound alarms at proposed GOP political-purity rules,” The Houston Press, 06 June 2002, http://www.houstonpress.com/issues/2002-06-06/insider.html/print.html, downloaded 17 Oct 2002
10. Waller, Douglas, “When Republicans Attack Republicans,” Time, 02 Jun 2002, http://www.time.com/time/columnist/printout/0,8816,345293,00.html, downloaded 07 Oct 2002
11. Merksamer, Samuel, “Cornellians, Lend Me Your Ears - From the Editor,” Cornell Review Online, 08 Nov 2002, http://www.cornellreview.org/viewart.cgi?num=93, downloaded 17 Oct 2002
12. Rosebrough, Chris, “Moderate Republicans Seek to Rip the Heart out of the Party,” The Rosebrough Report - The Voice of a Few Americans, 1998, http://www/acclaimedmedia.com/voafa/politics/rr/215.html, downloaded 30 Sep 2002
13. Bloomer, Charles, “Republicans on the Brink,” Enter Stage Right – web, 04 Jun 2001, http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/0601brink.htm, downloaded 17 Oct 2002
14. Meyer, Herbert E., “The Second Civil War – and How to Win it’” Republican Radio on the Air, 30 Jun 2002, http://www.republicanradio.com/second_civil_war.htm, downloaded 10 Sep 2002
15. Rolly, Paul, “Far Right Wing of Utah at Odds with LDS Positions,” 29 Apr 2002, http://www.sltrib.com/2002/apr/04282002/commenta/732062.htm, downloaded 10 Sep 2002
16. Eilperin, Juliet, “GOP Moderates Ask Leaders to Help End Attacks From Right,” Washington Post, 17 Mar 2000, http://www.clubforgrowth.com/articles/000317wp.html, downloaded 10 Sep 2002
17. Bresnahan, John; Crabtree, Susan, “Moderates Fume at GOP Leaders – Roukema Race Helps Spark Talk of Revolt,” Roll Call, 16 Mar 2000, http://www.rollcall.com/pages/news/00/03/news0316a.html#top, downloaded 30 Sep 2002
18 Cohen, Robert, “GOP Group Working to Defeat Moderate Republicans,” Newhouse News Source, c.2000, http://www.newhouse.com/archive/story1b050900.html, downloaded 27 Sep 2002
19. Eilperin, Juliet, “Conservative Group Picks Republicans for Dubious Honor,” Washington Post 25, Mar 2002, http:/www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A12348-2002Mar24?language=printer, downloaded 27 Sep 2002
Tags: Right Wing, Republican, Politics, conservative
Printer-friendly version