Righting The GOP Ship

Roy Blunt announced today that he's stepping down from the number 2 position in Republican leadership, the minority whip. The GOP leadership elections will be later this month. We need to encourage our favorite conservative voices to run for, and ultimately be elected, into top spots in the House. This is a chance for grassroot action, where we can let our representatives know that the voters want conservative, principled behavior from our leaders. My thoughts are for people like Shadegg, Pence, Ryan, or Cantor, but if I'm missing someone, I'm happy to hear other suggestions.

Here's the contact infor for some representatives. Send them emails and call their offices encouraging them to throw their hats into the ring for minority whip and GOP conference chairman, the number 3 position.

- Rep. John Shadegg (AZ-3): (202) 225-3361, click here for an email form.

- Rep. Mike Pence (IN-6): (202) 225-302, click here for an email form.

- Rep. Paul Ryan (WI-1): (202) 225-3031, click here for an email form.

- Rep. Eric Cantor (VA-7): (202) 225-2815, click here for an email form.

Cantor was Deputy Whip in the past few years, and did a great job there.

One of the problems over the past 15 years was that elected GOP officials rarely, if ever, heard from their conservative constituents. When we do get in touch with them, things happen (like killing the amnesty bill.)

Whoever you like, get in touch with them and let them know you want them to play a leadership role in the renaissance of conservative Republicans.

So, inspired as I was by some of the talk around here about RedRoots and organizing a new path for conservatism, I wandered on down to my local big bookstore, plopped in a chair, and started reading through some netroots stuff. Namely, I spent the majority of my time on The Practical Progressive, a directory of progressive groups and think tanks, and DailyKos's book.

Why? Not out of admiration nor out of any wish to simply mimic the Left, but rather to see if the reasons for their grassroots success could point us in the right direction. Here's a few quick observations.

1. Not surprisingly, there is a near-unanimous belief that the issue holding back the Left in the 90's and 00's was a lack of organization rather than a deficiency of quality candidates. I dunno how much I buy it, but many many lefties think that 2002 was a turning point, that the internet-boom of left-sites and re-formation of more established progressive groups (like NOW or Planned Parenthood) are primarily responsible for recent electoral success. I strongly disagree with this analysis, as I think the ineptitude of the GOP is much more responsible for the rise of the Left than DailyKos and MyDD.

2. Here's a highlight list of moments that progressives are taking credit for: exposing a culture of corruption (think Delay, Abramoff, Mark Foley; unearthing the issue of underprepared body armor for soldiers; reporting on Blackwater's "unfettered behavior" in Iraq; exposing GOP plants in the White House press corps; and  ousting John Bolton. What I took away from these claims was that:

a) a lot of the Left's victories in the past few years have been GOP-specific mistakes. If we took better care of our own house, many Left attacks would fall by the wayside. So, whatever shape our next step as conservatives takes, it should be essential that we rigorously inspect our own side for foibles. For example, right now Sen. McConnell, one of our own "conservative" leaders, is campaigning around Kentucky crowing about how much money he's directed his constituents' way. This is no different than Congressman Murtha. We don't need "right-wing" versions of the same statism, we need to rebuild our brand as fighters for freedom.

b.) Progressives, I think, are overstating their case if they believe any specific incident in the abovementioned laundry list is responsible for any specific electoral gain. I think they are correct, however, if they say that, as a whole, these stories created a mosaic of unresponsive, inept, and tainted-with-the-Beltway-stench politicians. What does that mean for the future? There needs to be a greater emphasis on constantly replenishing the well of conservative politicians in D.C.

Let the Left have Robert Byrd, Ted Kennedy, and John Conyers. Let the Left have the "lifetime" politicians who sit in their offices doling out government money to buy votes. We need to drop the Ted Stevens from our side. I don't think it's a coincidence that some of our best spokespeople have self-imposed term limits (Think Tom Coburn). Additionally, when we have men and women in D.C. who are there for a shorter period of time, it won't be as easy to sink into a bureaucratic lethargy. When you are in office for a defined period of time, it's easier to remind yourself why you were sent to D.C.: to return power, money, and responsibility to your consitituents, to effectively put yourself out of a job.

I'll put more in later posts, but I'd love to see some of y'all's thoughts, not just on my points but also your own ideas.

"jro" wrote some good responses in the comments to my last post on the decline of the GOP in Colorado Springs, my hometown. I was going to post this in the comments section as well, but it grew too large. It ends with some broader-rebuilding thoughts, which are what I'd really like to hear bandied about.

Good questions. Here's my brief synopsis:

1. The military will come out strong for McCain, no question. I think that they will always be around as a viable base for GOP activity. It's in the other categories of voters we're suffering.

2. Ted Haggard is distant memory. Pastor Brady Boyd is pretty popular, as well as Pastor Ross Parsley. The evangelical community is diverse enough and has enough church outlets that the one case at New Life Church shouldn't affect it much.

3. I agree wholeheartedly that enthusiasm from the base isn't very strong. A lot of my evie friends were Huckabee supporters (barf!), and as a brief aside, anyone who thinks that Mitt has a future in the GOP party needs to spend more time looking at some in the Christian movement: anti-Mormonism is quite strong and doesn't seem to be fading anytime soon.

I think you touch on some parts of the issue with the 4-8 year window of change. I think no small part comes from some dissatisfaction with the GWB administration. For many thirtysomething evangelicals, he was their first political candidate in their lifetime to closely identify with them. To see his second term devolve into a wimpfest of moderate gestures and unconvincing speeches was disheartening. But I also think there's part of this that is more personality than politics. For many evangelicals, their issues are strictly social (marriage and abortion, mainly, with some other things like homeschooling and God-in-the-public-square stuff), and they are downright squishes when it comes to economics.

We can definitely talk about this more, but I think a key part of the Righting the GOP Ship (as good a pun as I've seen yet. Pass it on!) will be addressing the need to have more of our public officials acting as advocates for freedom/conservatism, even to our own partymembers. We can't have Denny Hastert types in leadership, who might be great at playing the game in D.C. but are enigmatic, surly, or awkward when given the chance to talk. The Left has such control of MSM that it takes special communicating talents to cut through the b.s.