| About Us | Contact | Donate | User Blogs | Login |
A Reminder to RNC Members: We Don't Need a Chairman. We Need Leaders.
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?
- Matt Moon's blog
- Login or register to post comments


Comments
Sufficient freedom vs. sufficient power
The question, to my mind, wasn't whether they had sufficient freedom, but whether they had sufficient power in the form of necessary funds and tools to create their own, self-sufficient operations. The fight between Howard Dean and other Democrats had to do with the centrally-collected funds he allocated to non-battleground states so that they could get some of those organizers and communicators and tech people that you talked about. Other Democrats wanted him to spend money on critical campaigns, in races and states that were already considered competitive, to put them over the top for the Democrat.
Perhaps I was mistaken, but that was my impression.
Good Points All
n/t
We don't need a loser. We need a winner.
Obama's people must be jumping up and down with heady anticipation at the 2010 Congressional elections over the prospect of yet another term at the RNC helm for Michael Duncan.
His elections to the RNC Chair is nothing but a slap in the face to the grassroots of the party. It is saying to them, "Look, nothing is going to change because we are, in fact, on the right track. Look at Georgia. All we need is a few more dollars to persuade just a few more voters that our corporate agenda is really the party's political platform, and we will win the day."
ex animo
davidfarrar
The RNC has created an environment...
...where a real leader is not welcome. A real leader will stand on principle not grovel in the dirt for every dollar they can get from special interest groups trying to buy favors. Fundraising is the real problem. We need to toss the dirty, blood soaked $$ back in the face of corrupt org's like the U.S. Chamber and tell them, "get thee behind me". But then we need someone enlightened enough to find different sources of "clean" money to keep the party operational. And that "clean" money is out there. You tell me who that person is in the flock that is presently running for RNC chair. Not a one. DD
We Don't Need a Chairman. We Need Leaders.
Excellent observation. The essence of a free people is that all who are interested can have input, and the pathway to successful conservative ideas must start local and gain acceptance through the climb to recognition. Leaders can help the process by making it user friendly, encourage activity, etc.
What the US needs
Aside from our strategic/tactical perspective, we need to create a future where the US will survive.
We had eaten much of our seed corn. We have exported a lot of our value to other countries. There are good arguments to do this.
But, the secret is that we have to build more value in the US, so as to export more goods. We have to create assets (real assets, not leveraged, securitized, tranches of debt with fake ratings)
I don't know if we can do it. What are our in-house resources for engineering, science, manufacturing, etc? I watch a program on "how it's made". Automation calore. Great works of engineering cleverness and efficiency that add huge value to our country.
Then I see all the financial wizards with the fancy markow models and see that they have brought us down. The engineering model works just fine, thanks. Let's unlease our engineers and manufacturing people. Maybe be a little less wussy about nuclear.
We need to recapture our history of being the great creator. Put the rest of the toys away.
BTW
I have seen a couple of Republican reps pretty much singing Kumbaya in response to questions about Obama's proposals, nominee's etc.
I'm all fro Kumbaya, but does it really take Hitch to write a withering piece on Hill in Slate?
Subtitle: Why are so many oligarchs, royal families, and special-interest groups giving money to the Clinton Foundation?
Pretty brutal treatment. I guess the outsiders will have to keep the seats warm while the R's are up singing/dancing Kumbaya.
Calling Obama a tax cutter is
Calling Obama a tax cutter is complete and utter BS. Obama has never passed a single tax cut. NEVER. OTOH Obama already, as a Senator in the Democratic kleptocratic majority in Congress, voted for multiple tax increases in this Congress, and further wants to increase capital gains taxes, payroll taxes and income taxes on millions of Americans.
online engineering bachelor degree