RNC Chairman's race

In Part 1, written earlier this month, I focused on the need for not only the chairman, but all members of the RNC, to develop multiple leaders in campaign operations, policy, communications, fundraising and technology.

Dear Mr. Chairman:

Congratulations on your victory today. Your ascension to the chairmanship of the GOP is not only historic in nature; it also shows that many of the members of the RNC (as well as many of us in the grassroots and netroots of the party) were yearning for something different.

As someone who cares deeply about the issues surrounding ethnicity in America, I sincerely hope that the legacy of your chairmanship is not defined by your race, but by your efforts to move this party in a new direction. May you be remembered many election cycles from now, not as the first African-American chairman, but as a chairman who led with conviction and creativity during a time of transition.

One interesting thing to note is the process that we witnessed today. It took six ballots to get yourself elected, and it was still a close vote: 91-77. Whether this shows a split within the committee when it comes to strategy or personality, there does seem to be a split. I not only encourage you to reach out to all members of the RNC; I not only encourage you to reach out to conservative grassroots leaders that work within or without their state and local parties. I encourage you to have an honest exchange of ideas with Republicans across this country, and move this party from one that feeds off of anti-intellectualism to one that encourages political innovation and entrepreneurship.

You have endorsed the Rebuild the Party plan, and I will hold you to your pledge to implement this plan. There are many components to the plan that Patrick Ruffini and Mindy Finn have built. Let me focus on three things that I feel are especially important.

Hold campaigns and local parties accountable. Patrick and Mindy give specific goals for Congressional and Senate races when it comes to raising money and recruiting online activists. Here's what I would like to see. Ask every state and local party to give specific grassroots, electoral and fundraising goals. Publish those goals online. Reward parties that exceed expectations. Hold accountable those parties that fail to meet their goals. Shame works just as well as potential victory when it comes to incentivizing hard work and smart strategy.

Time for a new fundraising model. The plan calls for our 2012 Presidential nominee to be in a position to raise over 50% of their money online. The old model relies on the assumption that you have to raise money first in order to win supporters. Wrong! The Obama campaign taught us that with a true "movement" campaign, you want to gain supporters, and then get them to donate and volunteer, not necessarily in large amounts, but in smaller amounts over and over again. Qualitative characteristics of a fundraising model should matter just as much (maybe even more) than the quantitative characteristics. Just as "online activities" should not be a separate department within any party, fundraising and "the ask" should be integrated in as many facets of a campaign as possible.

When it comes to keeping state parties accountable, don't stop at Congress. It should be obvious to us that the state legislative and city council seats must be our farm team to develop leaders that can move up politically. But there's another important reason to focus on positions like Secretary of State and smaller legislative bodies like school boards. Decisions made closest to the people are critical, yet underreported. State and local governments truly are the laboratories of democracy, and we need good conservatives to run the public policy experiments.

Mr. Steele, promise me you will do two simple things: lead and develop leaders. Provide objectives and a vision, and inspire our grassroots to find new ways to achieve those objectives. Once again, congratulations!

Sincerely,

Matt Moon

Today, Republican media consultant Alex Castellanos endorsed Michael Steele for RNC chairman, and emphasized his ability to communicate:

"Steele is not just good at media appearances, he's great at them. He's a talented, passionate, and persuasive advocate of Republican principles. President-elect Obama will soon install Gov. Tim Kaine as chairman of the DNC — shouldn't the Republican party obtain a chairman who is ready on day one to square off against Kaine on CNN or Meet the Press?"

I respect Alex Castellanos, but ... No! No! No!

I've not only become agnostic on the RNC chairman's race; I've become apathetic. As I've pointed out in my immediate past post, the future of the party will be determined by leaders (or the lack thereof) in different states, in different campaign areas, both within and outside the status quo party structures.

Sure, Castellanos also mentions Steele's work as the Maryland state party chair and as GOPAC chair. But there's also the case against Steele that Rob Bluey wrote about a couple weeks ago at RedState that brings concern about his judgment when it comes to grassroots building.

Most importantly, there's a critical observation to make about Castellanos statement: should appearing and doing well on cable and news network shows be a primary prerequisite to being a qualified chairman? My perspective: it would be a nice bonus to have someone articulate to appear on MSM shows, but it should be nowhere near the top when it comes to priorities for the next RNC chairman:

• First, cable news and Sunday morning shows are a dying medium, and we should focus on a more diverse array of traditional and new spaces to spread our message.
• Second, why should the RNC waste it's time debating with Kaine? I want to see more debates between Ryan and Rangel on the budget and tax issues, between Sanford and Granholm on a bailout for state governments, etc.
• Third, we should be developing spokespeople at the state and local level to speak with local media. We should engage more with the Myrtle Beach Sun News and the local NBC affiliate than be worried about the New York Times or CNN.
• Fourth, I would want an RNC chairman that would be on the phone and on the computer all the time, (a) raising money and (b) communicating best and worst practices between state and local party officials, assisting in their efforts.
• Fifth, we should stay away from the intellectual laziness that is bred from celebrity politics. I have nothing against Michael Steele personally, but part of his appeal is his celebrity status in comparison to the other candidates. The fame of our chairman won't guarantee success at the operational, communications, fundraising, or policy levels when it comes to a party. In fact, it guarantees nothing.

There are some who are talking about what the right prerequisites and roles are for the next RNC chairman at RebuildTheParty.com's new forum. But let's not get sucked into the appeal of liking a candidate just because he sounds nice. The American people already did that on November 4, 2008.

BOTTOM LINE UP FRONT: Leadership is action, not position.

Today, RedState made its endorsement in the RNC chairman's race. (I've stayed agnostic on the matter.)

"We believe strongly that should Ken Blackwell not have enough votes to be RNC Chairman on the first ballot, Mike Duncan deserves the votes on the second ballot."

The Next Right has been dedicated to promoting discussion on the future of the Republican Party. RebuildTheParty.com has done a great job in formulating a set of plans that the GOP can move forward with. The debates over messaging, policy, technology, campaign strategy, the role of the RNC, and the role of the chairman have been healthy. But the discussion over the chairman's race needs to be set in the proper context.

Some of the candidates have been discussing "decentralization plans" and the "importance of state and local parties." But the fact is that the 168 members of the RNC don't answer to the chairman they elect. On a broad scale, state party chairmen, committeemen, committeewomen, and the state executive/central committees they represent already have a sufficient amount of freedom to effectively execute their own strategy. So here's a message to the members of the Republican National Committee:

We don't need a chairman. We need operational leaders. Even if the next RNC chairman executes some or most of the RebuildTheParty.com plan, it doesn't necessarily translate into state parties benefitting from change at the top. Chip Saltsman might know the political mechanics in Tennessee. Michael Steele might know the political mechanics in Maryland. Ken Blackwell might know the political mechanics in Ohio. But state and local party officials should not depend on the limited knowledge of the next RNC chairman and his staff to assist in building a farm team. State and local parties need to recruit their own people to formulate a "Rebuild Plan" of their own, independent of the RNC, which takes into account the idiosyncrasies of their region.

We don't need a chairman. We need policy leaders. State and local governments are truly the laboratories of our democracy. State and local party officials not only need to recruit and elect candidates that can innovate within state capitols and city halls. It's necessary to strengthen the lines of communication with the state think tankosphere and issue-based grassroots organizations to assist in policy innovation, with full knowledge that vigorous debate and disagreement will exist. The more internal policy competition there is, the better policy there will be to present to voters.

We don't need a chairman. We need communications leaders. This is very simple: the more spokespeople within state and local parties, the better. Having different communications leaders for different issues and different segments of society is critical to any grassroots outreach. Unity in message is not mutually exclusive with the quantity of available messengers.

We don't need a chairman. We need fundraising leaders. The Obama campaign showed incredible creativity in their fundraising capacity and the ability to provide tools to those who wanted to raise money from the bottom up. State and local party leaders should not solely look to the national organization for fundraising assistance. Since people feel more connected to a government that's closer to them (state legislators, city councilmen, etc.), state and local parties should recruit human resources to come up with creative fundraising outlets for these organizations and candidates.

We don't need a chairman. We need technology leaders. This also goes without saying. With all of the above intact, state and local parties need folks willing to build the tools that can catalyze many facets of a party or campaign operation.

I'm not belittling the importance of the next RNC chairman; this person will hopefully provide the vision and leadership necessary for the national organization to succeed. But just as some of the decisions of the federal government don't necessarily directly affect state and local governments, the fate of state and local parties are not, and should not be, directly tied to the success (or failure) of the national organization. We need to be reminded that state and local parties have the ability to determine their own future.

This also means the members of the RNC need to be in constant communication with each other, sharing best (and worst) practices and keeping each other accountable for the goals that they set.

The future of the Republican Party is not the responsibility of one man and his staff. It depends on the cultivation of leaders at the state and local level, both inside and outside the party organizations. The position (or lack thereof) within the party does not make one a leader; it's whether or not you take the actions necessary that defines leadership. Just as RNC members should keep the national chairman accountable, so should we shift some of our attention to state and local organizations and keep their leaders accountable. The Republican Party will move in a positive direction when leaders in different states rise to the occasion.

Even though we've made fun of him for saying this, Barack Obama would say: "We are the ones we've been waiting for." So the question to the members of the RNC is this: what are you waiting for?

I think this question from the RNCdebate site is very important:

Partial Quote:

"A resurgent Republican party needs to turn this around and brand itself as the "ipod" party - the party that gives citizens the most freedom, options, and choice. We need to offer a clear distinction between Democrats top-down, one-size-fits all policies by giving the American people policy choices, the ability to opt out, and policies that recognize state and regional differences. The best way to do this is to resurrect the idea of federalism. Will you commit to making federalism/local choice the key plank of a revitalized Republican Party?" 

The ATR has a site up where you can ask your own question to candidates for RNC Chair.  You can also rate the questions submitted by others.  Here's how they bill it:

After registering and logging in, you will be able to submit questions and vote on questions that will be asked at the RNC Chairmanship Candidates Debate on January 5, 2009 at 1 PM, live from the National Press Club. You will also be able to watch the debate live right here as well!

Check it out here.

 When I read that RNC member Gary Emineth, the North Dakota GOP Chairman, organized a coalition to demand an unprecedented "special" RNC meeting before the RNC Chairman's election, I had my usual reaction: "Another meeting?...ugh...what a waste." 

On campaign after campaign, I've bemoaned the fact that too much time, out of a typical 14-hour workday, goes to useless time-wasters.  No, I'm not referring to staffers who surf the Web, look at their friend's pics on Facebook, or play practical jokes on the guy or gal in the next cube over.  Those serve an important purpose compared to the biggest, most useless, waste of time on most campaigns: the never-ending, often unfocused meetings where little, if anything gets accomplished, except teeth grinding, nail chewing and overeating.

Thus, I've come to hate the word "meeting."  "Let's get together on," or "rendezvous about" or "discuss over coffee," are preferable.  Meeting sounds so official, institutional, excessive.

But then I read on, and opened my mind...and sipped some coffee.

This special RNC meeting, which RNC Chairman Mike Duncan has now called, has made an impact even before being held.  It has traveled a road that most other meetings never dare travel.  RNC members have successfully coalesced around an idea, a plan, and quickly put it into action.  They have been pro-active.  They have shown leadership.  They have provided much hope for the future of the Party.  They have already taken a step towards accomplishing their goal -- a more open forum for major party decisions.

Just as important, the RNC members have built on the ideas of others, even more low-down in the totem pole of official Party power: grassoots organizations outside the official Party heirarchy.  Since Election Day, several organizations, old and new, have pushed and prodded open the RNC Chairman's race. 

Americans for Tax Reform has held meetings and is planning a debate of their own.  Rebuild the Party, an organization I'm particularly proud of, has secured the endorsement of 5 out of 6 candidates for RNC Chairman and built an organization of over 10,000 people who want a stake in the future of the RNC.  ChooseYourChairman.com allows regular people to contact the RNC members in their state expressing support for one of the candidates for Chairman.

These and similar organizations share a common goal, the best interest of the Party as it seeks to revive itself.  They might differ in their approach, but that's what debates are for; debating the specific tactics and approaches our next RNC Chairman should take should drive the agenda at the (cough, cough) meeting on January 7th at a currently undiclosed location.

Emineth was beaten up at first by the blogosphere for this apparently heinous quote in The Hill, 'At the end of the day, it doesn't matter what the public thinks; it matters what 168 of us think.' Yet, when put in context (which he provided for us via blog post and in a follow-up Hill article) one understands that this quote resulted from the same frustration shared by many Republican activists.  Emineth, a sitting RNC Chairman, has felt powerless to make a different within the RNC power structure.  This powerless feeling has permeated Republican activists and organizations as they've felt obliged to cater to the will of a Republican White House, and at times, a Republican majority in Congress.  

Emineth, and the coalition that called for the (cough, cough) meeting see the opportunity at hand: an open field, the lack of a mandate.  In such a situation, the RNC members play an important role, electing the next Chairman.  In the past, most of these same RNC members have merely had the chance to approve the RNC Chairman for cosmetic purposes.  

If our elected RNC members don't even have real power in the Party, should we expect the grassroots to be empowered? 

Emineth and the coalition behind his effort have taken a baby step that shows real promise for a more open, productive and innovative Republican Party. Even if they had to call a meeting to do it.    

Political observers of all stripes know that Mitt Romney wants to run for President in 2012. He seemed to have a future run in mind the day he quit the 2008 race at CPAC this past February. As the Boston Globe recently reported, Romney’s Free and Strong America PAC has barely doled out any cash to preferred candidates and is viewed as likely saving up for a 2012 run.

What then does Romney have planned for the next four years? Here are five reasons why heading the RNC would help him with another run at the presidency:

1) It’s the Economy, Stupid: The Republican Party became the party of big government conservatism and wasteful spending over the past eight years. It needs to reclaim a fiscally conservative message to broaden its base and appeal to working-class Americans. The biggest issue facing the country over the next year is likely to be the continued economic crisis, and unlike traditional party hacks, Romney has real credentials in this arena. He is uniquely positioned to be a party leader on economic issues.

2) Default Opposition to Obama: If he hopes to be successful in a 2012 run, Romney will first have to convince Republicans that he is the best alternative to a President Obama. By assuming the Chairmanship, the media will anoint him as the opposition leader by default four years in advance. Having a steady platform with which to contrast with Obama will give him a significant leg-up heading into the 2012 primaries.

3) Republican Message Control: Rather than having to worry about what the national party is saying and doing in the 2010 election cycle, Romney will be able to control that message (at least that coming from the RNC, Congress is another story). This will allow him to decide on a method of contrast and attack during his tenure that will then flow into his 2012 bid.

4) Re-shape the Party Message: Romney was sharply criticized in the 2008 primary cycle for flip-flopping on various issues, mostly social, to accommodate the Republican base. As Chairman, Romney would have the ability, both subtly and overtly, to re-shape the party message to his liking rather than feel the need to adjust his positions to fit party orthodoxy.

5) Continue to Chip Away at Mormon Issue: Being elected Chairman would not eliminate this as a potential issue for Romney. Ken Mehlman ran the RNC and it would be difficult to argue that a Jewish candidate would still not face significant opposition in certain circles of the party. But by taking on such a visible leadership role, this would allow Republicans, Democrats, and Independents to view him simply as the Republican leader rather than as a member of any specific religious faith.

After serving two-years as Chairman, through the 2010 election cycle, Romney could then announce his intentions to run for President and focus on the buildup of his campaign operation ahead of the primary election.

Critics of a Romney chairmanship would likely argue that assuming such a position would provide little political benefit for him. He would be wasting his time.

Why bog yourself down running day-to-day operations of a national party?

There is no requirement that the RNC Chairman be involved in day-to-day operations of a bureaucracy. Rather, Romney could install a capable, well-respected, and trusted Executive Director for the party while acting largely as a spokesman and big-picture planner. He would immediately become the face of the party. He could only dream of attaining this status over the next two years if he were to continue to stand on the sidelines.

Romney is too high-profile to run the RNC.

Says who? McCain had too little money to win the nomination. Obama was too inexperienced to be elected President. There is no rulebook to this game. The political media is scarcely paying any attention to the race for Chairman, let alone the average American, who does not even know that there is a race. The party has a leadership void and both the party and the media would embrace having someone high-profile at the helm.

Running the RNC may help him get through the primaries, but would be harmful in a general election.

George Bush headed the RNC in the 1970s a decade before becoming President. Given the messiah-like way in which Obama rose to victory in this election, it is hard to argue that 2012 will be anything other than a referendum on the Obama presidency. So why not accept this fact and start drawing contrasts where they exist right away? There is no better vehicle for Romney to articulate his message than by serving as the head of his party.

RNC duties would get in the way of fundraising for his campaign.

This may be true. But Romney’s considerable personal wealth makes this less important of an issue than it would be for most candidates. In addition, the benefits of traveling to all fifty states for the RNC and building up considerable institutional support amongst RNC members and GOP activists far outweigh the costs of reduced fundraising capacity.

Disclosure: This author is not supporting Romney for this position.

Michigan Republican Party Chairman Saul Anuzis wrote a lengthy article for Politico making the case that conservative ideas can still win, citing as evidence President-elect Barack Obama's embrace of many conservative themes during the campaign. Anuzis is absolutely correct, and that's exactly why we should hold Obama accountable for his promises.

Unfortunately, one of the "bold, conservative ideas" that Anuzis cites as an example is what's known as a tax holiday. In other words, he wants conservatives to embrace a tax version of Keynesianism that has little chance of accomplishing its goal of stimulating economic growth. Here is Anuzis' argument:

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) has proposed taking the $350 billion pledged to the Wall Street bailout and instead funding a two month tax holiday for all Americans. That's two months of no income taxes, Social Security or Medicare taxes. That's thousands of dollars to pay mortgages, buy cars or invest in starting a new business that creates jobs. Newt Gingrich takes Rep. Gohmert's idea one step further, suggesting that instead of adopting Speaker Pelosi's dream of a $700 billion stimulus program, the tax holiday could be extended to a full six months. Now, that's what I call the mother of all stimulus packages!

There's one big problem with this stimulus package: It won't work. There's no good evidence that short-term jolts (such as tax holidays and tax rebates) spur economic growth. As my Heritage Foundation colleague Stuart Butler explains, putting dollars in people's hands doesn't mean they'll rush to the store, buy goods and create jobs. Bloggers got a chance to quiz Gohmert about it last week, and many appeared skeptical of the idea.

Don't get me wrong, Anuzis' intentions are correct. I'd rather keep the money than send it to Washington. But if the purpose is to stimulate the economy, this isn't the right approach. If Anuzis is going to advocate for policy solutions, he should embrace permanent tax rate reductions, repeal of the death tax and reduction of the corporate tax rate. (It's another question of whether the RNC chairman should stay out of policy and focus on politics.)

Conservatives are eager to offer new ideas, but we need to remember that not every new idea is a good idea.

Apologies for the long lapse between blog posts. The flu and work have been keeping me at bay.

I have not yet made a decision as to who to support for the RNC chairmanship, and I have not yet heard or met every candidate running. So it would be unfair for me to endorse anybody at this point. But I am intrigued with Michigan GOP chairman Saul Anuzis.

This morning at the American Spectator's Newsmaker Breakfast at the offices of Americans for Tax Reform, Anuzis made his case to be the party's top man, saying that he wants the GOP to be rebranded as the party that can "restore the American dream." Talking about his immigrant roots, Anuzis identified himself as a believer in the Newt Gingrich-Jack Kemp message of the "opportunity society."

The most interesting part of the conversation came up after being asked about his "losing" record as party chairman of the Great Lakes State and how that qualifies him to head the RNC. Anuzis responded agressively, saying that that means no party chair from a blue state should be qualified to run for the GOP chairmanship. He said that his background growing up in blue-collar suburbia among Reagan Democrats and Independents makes him especially qualified to be the next chairman because those are the voters that the we need to go after.

While I don't necessarily agree that past categorizations of voter identification will work in future election cycles, I'm impressed with Anuzis for a few reasons:

• While everybody realizes that the party needs to be rebranded, I like the direction he's going when it comes to the type of rebranding we need. I'm all about building "An Agenda of Equal Opportunity" that can battle the liberal movement's "Agenda of Equal Outcomes."
• Anuzis seems like someone willing to take risks. He's endorsed the RebuildTheParty.com platform and has had great state legislative recruitment success in Michigan, something that he could translate to a 435 District Strategy (something that Patrick has been plugging). He also talked a lot about outreach to African-Americans and going to their playing field: churches.
• Anuzis seems to get Web 2.0 tools. While I don't know whether or not he's interested in buildings communities vs. building lists (as Chip Saltsman mentioned), he has been using Twitter to communicate with conservatives. When asked about criticism of him concerning his use of Twitter to promote himself instead of the Michigan GOP, he rightfully said that people aren't interested in having a conversation with press releases from the Michigan GOP. People are interested in having conversations with personalities. Sure, he's using his Twitter account to promote his candidacy for the chairmanship; but he's also using it to build a community by being refreshingly honest and approachable in his Tweets. (By the way, I'll be shameless here. If you'd like to follow me on Twitter, I'm @alaskan.)

I haven't been paying attention to who the front-runners are for the chairmanship and which candidates have how much support. But if Anuzis does not win, the new chairman should consider tapping Anuzis to be a liaison to the state parties and giving him a travel budget to visit all 50 states consistently. If the new chairman does not tap him, Anuzis should consider working with groups like Slatecard or building a new organization that can allow him to help rebuild state and local parties. Why?

• While Congressional leaders need to come up with their own agenda of equal opportunity, Anuzis could be a great at helping state legislators and state legislative candidates in each state coming up with state-based agendas of equal opportunity. Like Soren has mentioned before, the battles that need to be won are at the state level. Anuzis can use what he learned about recruiting in Michigan and help party leaders around the nation recruit for state legislative, city council and school board seats to build a strong GOP Farm Team.
• Anuzis' use and willingness to learn Web 2.0 tools could give him a platform to help state and local party leaders start building online communities instead of online lists. Patrick is correct that Twitter is only one small part of Web tools that we can use. Anuzis could be a bridge between the 50+ and 60+ generation of party leaders that have no clue about Web 2.0 tools and the under-40 activists that can help state and local parties reach the next level.

There are some state and local parties that are in shambles, and the next chairman of the RNC can't spend of all his time worrying about every party organization. But it would be wise for the next set of GOP leaders to help Saul Anuzis (or someone else) travel to and help rebuild party organizations in all 435 districts.

Bottom Line Up Front: The next leadership group of the GOP must rise above the different wings of the party. Political inclusiveness, public policy creativity, long term strategic thinking and risk-taking are the characteristics I'll be looking for in a chairman/minority leader.

I am now a proud coalition member of RebuildTheParty.com, and today's newspapers are highlighting stories and opinion pieces on the future of the GOP. Adam Nagourney of the New York Times writes an all-encompassing piece on the upcoming RGA meeting in Miami as well as leadership battles for the RNC chairmanship and Congressional minority leadership positions. Newt Gingrich points out that "the party would be wiser to offer a broad idea of what it stood for and how it would lead the country, and pick its battles carefully." Gingrich and former Maryland Lt. Governor and current GOPAC chairman are privately seeking the RNC chairmanship, according to Ralph Hallow of the Washington Times. One of the sticking points seems to focus on how to emulate Howard Dean's 50 State Strategy:

"Republicans, especially state party leaders, have become envious of the organization and money that Mr. Dean's operation deployed in two victorious election cycles in which Democrats regained and expanded control of Congress and captured the White House.

"Republicans agree that their national party is leaderless and in desperate need of someone who has the force of personality and history of accomplishments to command national attention to take on Mr. Obama. Someone is also needed to unite disparate factions that, even in the best of times, generate internal friction among themselves."

I've written before on the importance of building a GOP Farm Team, but a little disappointed with the few responses to questions I had for state party chairs. Patrick recently urged us to "expand the map" by coming up with a 435 District Strategy. There were 8 op-eds today on the future of the GOP, 6 of them in the Wall Street Journal, that deserve some thought and response.