There’s been a lot of talk lately about a proposed RNC resolution regarding candidates who want Republican Party support. It’s been referred to as a number of things, some saying it’s a litmus test, others saying it’s just so voters will know that the Party only supports candidates who agree with the Party (the Republican voters) most of the time. After all, if the brand stands for anything under the sun, does it really stand for anything? Liberals claimed it was too conservative, some conservatives claimed it was too liberal. And the press did its best to make it something it wasn’t, labeling it a litmus test when it was simply a statement that says if you are with us most of the time, we’ll support you and if you aren’t, we won’t.
In response to all the misinformation this resolution was getting some RNC members proposed a couple of alternative resolutions. One of them is based on what the Republican Party Platform says which seems very logical to us. We’ve posted this one below. What do you think? Share your thoughts here as I’m sure our RNC members will drop by to see what you think.
Proposed RNC Resolution on Accountability of Candidates To the Voters
WHEREAS, President Ronald Reagan believed that the Republican Party should support and espouse conservative principles and public policies; and
WHEREAS, President Ronald Reagan also believed the Republican Party should welcome those with diverse views; and
WHEREAS, the Republican National Committee shares President Ronald Reagan’s belief that the Republican Party should espouse conservative principles and public policies and should welcome persons of diverse views; and
WHEREAS, Republican faithfulness to its conservative principles and public policies and Republican solidarity in opposition to Obama’s socialist agenda is necessary to preserve the security of our country, our economic and political freedoms, and our way of life; and
WHEREAS, Republican faithfulness to its conservative principles and public policies is also necessary to restore the trust of the American people in the Republican Party, to prevent the emergence of a third party movement, and to lead to Republican electoral victories; and
WHEREAS, in addition to supporting candidates, the Republican National Committee provides financial support for Republican state and local parties for party building and federal election activities, which benefits all candidates and is not affected by this resolution; and
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chairman of the Republican National Committee is empowered to take into account a candidate’s faithfulness to the Republican Party’s conservative principles and public policies, as established in the Republican Party’s national platform and resolutions by the RNC, in making the decision, in the best interests of the Republican Party and its principles and consistent with the Rules of the Republican National Committee, that a candidate shall receive financial support from the Republican National Committee; and
RESOLVED, that the Chairman of the Republican National Committee shall require that, as a condition to a candidate’s receipt of a contribution or coordinated expenditure from the Republican National Committee, the candidate agrees to refund such funds if the candidate endorses a Democrat candidate in that race during that election cycle or endorses a Democrat candidate for President in the next Presidential election; and
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
Co-Sponsors:
Avie Axdahl NCW MN
Donna Cain NCW OR
Cindy Costa NCW SC
Debbie Joslin NCW AK
Peggy Lambert NCW TN
Carolyn McLarty NCW OK
Pete Rickets NCM NE
Steve Scheffler NCM IA
Helen Van Etten NCW KS
Solomon Yue NCM OR
Loading ...
on Jan 8th, 2010 at 11:48 am
This is such a no-brainer. It needs done PERIOD. This is so common sense it is stupid. The dems do this kind of thing all day long and then whine all day long about how non-inclusive it is if we enough think about it. Their pro-abort and pro-GIVEEVERYDIMEINTHEWORLDTOEDUCATION litmus tests are just a starting point. It isn’t even about “conservative” principles. Let’s get real for a minute. Not everyone in the GOP is a conservative and not every conservative is of that bent for the same reason. We have a big house. It just doesn’t need to include RINO’s. So, instead of camping out on requiring conservative principles, we should simply rate votes and require anyone running under our banner to meet the same test that legislation does — 3/4. If during the last legislative session, you did not vote 75% in line with GOP principles, you should not be able to register in the next election as a GOP candidate. It doesn’t get any more straightforward than that. We have a minimum threshold we much maintain. Since we are a party of principles and integrity, why let there be so much wiggle room? You have to be 18 to vote. So, if you are a really good person and you just saved someone’s life and you say you are very careful and pay a lot of attention to the issues should we let you vote at 17.5? Probably, but we can’t bend the rules for you. Neither should we bend our principles to include people without any.
on Jan 30th, 2010 at 3:23 pm
Well, considering the fact that I am one of the party leaders, no one asked me about this. Why not?
Regardless, I am a party leader reshaping the GOP so at least federally, we are going to sweep all federal elections. And at the state and local level, we are going to do well also. Everyone is tired of fiscal irresponibility. And it time to hold those whom almost caused our country to collaspe to the biggest depression since the Great Depression, there is the imminent need for a “new generation of leaders”. As stated by Moore. Finally, he said something I agree with. Further, isn’t Nick Jordan the same generation as Moore. We need to get rid of him also.
Election a new generation of leaders in 2010. Try Scherer. He is better.
on Jan 30th, 2010 at 3:27 pm
Postscript. And don’t even get me started on how horrible Larry Gates is. He, Sebelius and Moore collectively ruined the Kansas Democatic Socialist Party for decades. The Dem Socialists failed to plan for a new generation of leaders. Hence, due to that failure and lack of leadership, I joined the Kansas GOP.
The Kansas GOP is light years ahead of the Kansas Dem Socialists. And will remain that way for an indefinite future. Blame Larry Gates. I do.
tdus
on Jan 30th, 2010 at 3:30 pm
Further, we need to get rid of Steve Cloud. He is supporting both dems and republicans. Why? Ask him.
He won’t tell me. But we know, don’t we Steve?
on Jan 30th, 2010 at 3:33 pm
I also think Sam Brownback and his cronies need to be purged. Brownback ruined our nation as a Senator. Why would we want him to be a GOV? Look at how hard Ron Thornburgh worked to be our next GOV. And then in pops Brownback and his cronies ruining our state party. Get rid of Brownback.
I don’t trust him and look what he did to our nation? What is he going to do? Ruin Kansas now? No thanks, Sam. You have done enough damage. Be honorable and just retire.
tdus
on Feb 1st, 2010 at 3:30 pm
I have no problem with a litmus test or whatever you want to call it. Being a Republican should stand for something.
I do wonder, though, why we have to continue to bring President Reagan into the discussion. I have no problem with him, but I was in grade school when he was president so I really don’t have any connection to him. Nor do most younger voters.
I think we need to keep the focus on the principles, not on specific individuals.