National Journal.com

nationaljournal.com > Hotline On Call

RNC Revives "Socialist" Debate, To Vote On Principles

Key conservatives on the RNC are circulating a resolution that would canonize an oft-quoted proverb attributed to Ronald Reagan while labeling Pres. Obama's agenda as "socialist."

The resolution would prohibit RNC money from flowing to any candidate who disagrees with more than two itemized planks of the GOP platform -- playing off Reagan's maxim that anyone who agreed with him 80% of the time is not 20% an enemy.

A candidate who disagrees, "as identified by the voting record, public statements and/or signed questionnaire of the candidate, shall not be eligible for financial support and endorsement by the Republican National Committee," the resolution says.

Sponsored by IN national committeeman Jim Bopp and 9 other conservatives on the RNC, wording of the resolution is still being discussed, a source tells Hotline OnCall. When finalized, the resolution will be submitted for discussion at party's semiannual meeting in HI.

The resolution became necessary, Bopp said, after the special election in NY23, in which the GOP candidate backed a Dem over a Conservative Party nominee once it became clear she could not win.

"Having the RNC financially support liberal Republicans who are future party splitters is just very damaging to our ability to reclaim our conservative bona fides," Bopp told Hotline OnCall.

"Over the last several years, we've supported [ex-Sen. Lincoln] Chafee, then [Sen. Arlen] Specter, then [Assemb.] Dede [Scozzafava] in New York 23," Bopp added. "In each case, we invested hundreds of thousands of dollars, if not millions, and the result was severe damage to our credibility among conservaitves, and in each case they switched parties, and/or endorsed the Democrat. We just need to have some standards so this won't happen again."

RNC chairman Michael Steele has come under fire from some conservatives for spending party money to back Scozzafava. He has said he had no choice but to back the GOP nominee, identical reasoning to that of NRCC chair Pete Sessions. When Scozzafava suspended her campaign and backed Rep. Bill Owens (D) over Conservative Party nominee Doug Hoffman, both Steele and Sessions threw their support behind Hoffman.

The resolution in its current form would appear to give Steele an excuse not to back a candidate, but it could prohibit him from spending money on behalf of others, if enough RNC members were to object. But the resolution specifically exempts money sent to state and local parties.

It is not the first time Bopp has introduced what could prove to be a controversial resolution. Earlier this year, Bopp offered a resolution condemning Obama's agenda as socialist; Steele allies eventually brokered a compromise that softened the language.

Now the language is back, encouraging "Republican solidarity in opposition to Obama's socialist agenda." Steele and centrists on the committee are likely to work to soften language once again.

But it may get wide acceptance, Bopp noted, in that the resolution codifies what centrists and pragmatists have wanted all along: A more open, accepting party.

"By endorsing Reagan's view, ... we are also embracing a principle that the moderates have been advocating for years, that you don't have to agree with the Republican Party's platform or principles every time, as long as you agree with us most of the time," he said. "That establishes our willingness to be open to people of diverse opinion."

UPDATE: RNC spokesperson Gail Gitcho emails a statement: "The deadline for submitting Resolutions for the RNC Winter Meeting is more than 30 days away. At this point, we do not what resolutions will be submitted nor what the final language of any resolution ultimately submitted may be."

A list of the GOP's ten core principles, as enumerated in the resolution's proposed text, are after the jump.

(REID WILSON)

Text from Jim Bopp's resolution, as circulated among several RNC members:

"THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Republican National Committee identifies ten (10) key public policy positions for the 2010 election cycle, which the Republican National Committee expects its public officials and candidates to support:

(1) We support smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes by opposing bills like Obama's "stimulus" bill;

(2) We support market-based health care reform and oppose Obama-style government run healthcare;

(3) We support market-based energy reforms by opposing cap and trade legislation;

(4) We support workers' right to secret ballot by opposing card check;

(5) We support legal immigration and assimilation into American society by opposing amnesty for illegal immigrants;

(6) We support victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges;

(7) We support containment of Iran and North Korea, particularly effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat;

(8) We support retention of the Defense of Marriage Act;

(9) We support protecting the lives of vulnerable persons by opposing health care rationing and denial of health care and government funding of abortion; and

(10) We support the right to keep and bear arms by opposing government restrictions on gun ownership; and be further

RESOLVED, that a candidate who disagrees with three or more of the above stated public policy position of the Republican National Committee, as identified by the voting record, public statements and/or signed questionnaire of the candidate, shall not be eligible for financial support and endorsement by the Republican National Committee; and be further

RESOLVED, that upon the approval of this resolution the Republican National Committee shall deliver a copy of this resolution to each of Republican members of Congress, all Republican candidates for Congress, as they become known, and to each Republican state and territorial party office.

Chief Sponsor:
James Bopp, Jr. NCM IN

Sponsors:
Donna Cain NCW OR
Cindy Costa NCW SC
Demetra Demonte NCW IL
Peggy Lambert NCW TN
Carolyn McLarty NCW OK
Pete Rickets NCM NE
Steve Scheffler NCM IA
Helen Van Etten NCW KA
Solomon Yue NCM OR"

17 Comments

Here are 10 things market research has shown that our target demographic would like us to be douchebags about. You will follow party guidelines/focus group recommendations regardless of new information/common sense/actual thought or forfeit your party funding.

sponsors:
bunch of douchebags

This article is 99% about the party platform and has one line in it about the "socialist" label, yet the headline blaringly reads "RNC Revives 'Socialist' Debate..." with "to vote on principles" thrown in almost as an after thought. Is an honest portrayal of reality too much to ask for these days from reporters and editors?

FYI
RE: sick of fradulent headlines

"Key conservatives on the RNC are circulating a resolution that would canonize an oft-quoted proverb attributed to Ronald Reagan while labeling Pres. Obama's agenda as 'socialist.'"

"Earlier this year, Bopp offered a resolution condemning Obama's agenda as socialist"

Now the language is back, encouraging "Republican solidarity in opposition to Obama's socialist agenda."

The whole purpose of laying out the ten principles is "encouraging 'Republican solidarity in opposition to Obama's socialist agenda'" I think the title of the article is quite fitting. Bopp wants to include in the ten principles that Obama has a socialist agenda.

Notice incidentally that (1) probably conflicts with (6), (7) and (9).

"Smaller government" but more surges and more spending on military troops and containment for N. Korea, Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan.

Opposition to any health care "rationing" presumably means higher Medicare payments, and thus higher deficits and _much_ more government spending.

I think it's probably that "market-based health care", as intended by the GOP, also means more spending and deficits - more payments into Medicare HMOs, for instance - but I guess whether (1) and (2) also conflict is debatable.

Good points, ZC.

As for smaller government and less deficit spending, can you refresh my memory as to when Republicans submitted a balanced budget and what they did to reduce the growth of government when they controlled both the White House and Congress? Outside of Ron Paul, I cannot think of any Republican who actually tried to eliminate deficit spending and government growth.

Yes, I encourage all Republicans to sign this. That way, only the extreme right-wing will get funding and will be a wonderful way to marginalize the republicans as a party of extremists, just like the Taliban.

Valuable thoughts and advices. I read your topic with great interest.
cipro online

Whoever came up with these needs to hire a copywriter. These bullets are poorly worded, and someone who agrees with most of it in principle might be turned off by much of the exact wording.

This is a viable idea in theory, but what about candidates who do not support the Republican socialist-lite versions of these programs? I guess they would be excluded from funding too.

And the warmongering planks #6 and #7 are just crazy. Those are the real nutjobs - the ones who demand perpetual war.

in actuality every point with the possible exemption of #10 in some way conflicts with #1 its just that the effects may not be immediately evident but isnt lack of foresight a GOP trademark?

Perfect for me... At least "Bomb bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran" is covered. I could use some insights on how to expand my favorite song to include North Korea though...

Either way the idea is good, maybe in 2012 I'll get to sing "bomb bomb bomb bomb bomb the world"!

Come on, Republicans, stand up like adults with some spine and add a few more principles.

11. We oppose socialized medicine and seek, as advocated by Reagan and Goldwater, the repeal of Medicare and Medicaid.

12. We oppose socialized retirement and renew the calls of our conservative leadership (in 1930's) to repeal Social Security.

13. We oppose socialized education and believe the parents, not the government, should decide where or if to send their school to children by repeating mandatory K-12.

These are all logical and inevitable extensions of a conservative philosophy and should be clearly articulated.

In truth, immediately i didn't understand the essence. But after re-reading all at once became clear.

Please, can you PM me and tell me few more things about this, I am really fan of your blog! I just subscribed to your feed.

I would like to thank you for the efforts you have made in writing this article. I am hoping the same best work from you in the future as well. In fact your creative writing abilities has inspired me to start my own BlogEngine blog now. Really the blogging is spreading its wings rapidly. Your write up is a fine example of it.

I fervently hope that the RNC adopts this "litmus test". Remember that "reality is a socialist - marxist - commie plot." They forgot that in the bullet points.

I like the idea of pulling the RNC back to the Platform. Bopp's proposal is a start. I also agree with ZC that "(1) probably conflicts with (6), (7)." We've been neo-conned into thinking we need to support constant warfare. Jefferson is rolling in his grave at the thought of it.

(9)could be re-written to support the pro-life plank without asking for more government.

MN's State Central Committee past a somewhat similar Resolution on Dec 5. Nat'l Committeewoman Evie Axdahl will be bringing it to the HI meeting. It would bind the RNC from financially supporting a RINO if a real Conservative is in the race.

Advantageously, the article is really the freshest on this noteworthy topic. I fit in with your conclusions and will eagerly look forward to your upcoming updates. Saying thanks will not just be sufficient, for the fantasti c clarity in your writing. I will right away grab your rss feed to stay informed of any updates. Admirable work and much success in your business enterprize!