“We have a sizable collection of elected officials, former officials, and Party apparatchiks who have never been conservative other than by their own definition, with a long history of seeding chaos and fighting conservatives.”
The Republican Party of Virginia (RPV) emphasizes personality and party loyalty over ideas and integrity – and relishes personal position over winning elections.
It has never grown out of its early years as an outgrowth of the Byrd-era machine.
It’s ironic, that the emphasis on personality and party loyalty becomes the very vehicle for our collective defeat both in politics and the culture in Virginia, and now nationally to a large extent. Since Reagan, there has been the rise of the “sound-bite” or faux conservative, where real ideas are subordinated to the bromide of the moment just to win an election. So we have politicians saying that they are for “limited government” or that they “won’t raise taxes,” but never engage in the heavy intellectual lifting to promote the moral or practical benefit of those ideas or policies.
The best Virginia example would be the faux conservative former Governor, Bob McDonnell and his $6 billion dollar tax boondoggle. Or nationally, George Bush (41) and his “read my lips, no new taxes” disaster.
You can follow the bread crumbs of how this dismissive attitude towards serious issues, ideas and policy works its way into refusing to engage in serious discussions, or “issueless” campaigns. This shows up in strange ways. Only a few nights ago, I was surprised to hear a County Chairman say we “all” had deeply held views, and strong principles, but we had to be careful about how we discussed those in the contentious politics of a very diverse Northern Virginia. I left scratching my head in wonder; how can we win elections if we can’t articulate our deeply held principles, or they aren’t important enough to fight for?
The recent deliberate, coordinated stacking of Republican County meetings with Democrats and county employees to thwart conservative victories, the rejection of long standing Party practice, and the cheering on of a group of individuals who are in direct opposition to the Party’s pledge and long held beliefs, is simply the latest in a long train of personal and organizational abuses that have stymied and chocked off what should have been robust growth of the RPV over the last generation.
To demonstrate just how wedded that “establishment” of the RPV is to personality and party over ideas and winning elections, especially conservative victories, allow me to reach back to 2008.
Within weeks of being elected to the State Central Committee (SCC) of the RPV in 2008, I attended the state convention held in Richmond which was picking a new RPV chairman. The election featured a young upstart, Delegate Jeff Frederick from Woodbridge, taking on the sitting RPV chairman, former Lt. Governor John Hager (who also served in the Democratic Warner Administration!). I had run and defeated a sitting SCC member on the basis that the Party needed to be shaken up, and that it needed a huge dose of conservative principles to win elections, a position Frederick was espousing. I jumped into his campaign with both feet, still too green to know that the old guard of the RPV looked at Frederick like a chicken farmer looks at a fox.
Frederick ran a brilliant campaign and delivered a massive victory over the hapless Hager. Frederick was more than an exhilarating breath of fresh air; he was a direct threat to the established old guard, led then – as now – by the longtime RPV First Vice-Chair, Mike Thomas. I was standing on the floor of the convention, with two SCC Executive Committee members standing right behind me, and with the convention crowds still cheering, I heard this threat, “This election will not stand.” I was dumfounded to hear Party officials openly talk about taking out a new chairman – the first chairman actually elected instead of appointed in some time – and the election had not been over five minutes!
And from that day forward, the engineering of Frederick’s removal went into high gear. Spearheaded by then candidate and now disgraced former Gov. Bob McDonnell, the old guard of the SCC Executive Committee and Thomas destroyed Frederick within months. Ironically, they came up with a list of vague, largely unsubstantiated “charges” against Frederick that at the end of the day amounted to poor communication skills on the part of Frederick.
By the time they were finished, you would have thought Frederick had done what McDonnell actually did!
A group of conservatives teamed up to defend Frederick’s being voted out by two-thirds of the sitting SCC. I was proudly a prime ring leader of the defense, and took part in a “secret” meeting in Charlottesville, just days before the SCC meeting was to meet to fire Frederick. The meeting was called by Thomas and few other members of the old guard to bully and threaten Frederick into stepping down instead of having an “impeachment trial” by the SCC. Frederick refused, and ended up before the SCC, getting 18 votes in support, just one short of saving his chairmanship, and the old guard had to resort to extra-ordinary rules to oust him by that one vote.
Sadly, that is the way the RPV and many of our elected officials still work as we just saw recently with Eric Cantor’s money and Thomas’ leadership in the 5th and 7th Districts. The end justifies the means – anything goes.
The pushback by grassroots conservatives in the 5th and 7th District’s this year was heartening. But, just like the battle over Jeff Frederick in 2008, the old guard will not give up.
We have a sizable collection of elected officials, former officials, and Party apparatchiks who have never been conservative other than by their own definition, with a long history of seeding chaos and fighting conservatives. Conservatives can expect more of the same – just imagine if the establishment fought Democrats as hard as it does conservatives.
There is only one answer, of course. Conservatives – real Reagan style conservatives, not the faux conservatives we have in abundance in both Washington and Richmond – must become a hammer to the old guard nail.
We need to hold politicians and Party leaders accountable for what they do, not what they say they do.
And, somehow, we need to raise money as a collective movement to provide the funds required to drag the Party into the 21st century world and de-emphasize personality and Party loyalty in favor of ideas and integrity.
That won’t be easy. It would mean that a mature conservative movement would have to become engaged continually in our local Party if we are going to be heard in the statewide Party. It means in the future, state delegates and senators who vote for a $6 billion tax increase pushed by a faux conservative Governor will not be rewarded with an uncontested primary. It means that a politician who claims the mantle of conservatism, yet funds party division, pushes amnesty, increased taxes, increased government and decreased liberty, such as Eric Cantor, needs to be confronted intellectually and politically.
All of this is hard. But if not us, who? If not now, when?
32 comments
[…] From his experience as a Reagan campaign worker and administration staffer and his service on the RPV State Central Committee during 2008-12, Mike Giere provides valuable background into the Republican rift that has blossomed over the past year. He writes in The Bull Elephant: […]
Mike, this article is worth a long lunch. For instance, you call Bob McDonnell a fake conservative because of the transportation bill last year, but Reagan remains your hero and he passed that huge gas tax increase for transportation. Most of those who are the Establishment targets today were part of the Reagan Revolution years ago or came of age with Reagan as their leader. The problem today is that the new rebels want to be “at the table” just as we wanted when we were young rebels. Today’s Establishment needs to remember they were once the rebels on the outside. Today’s rebels, the Tea Party and the libertarians, are good for the party and need to be in the room and at the table. But they are only part, although an important part, of a successful GOP. We win by building our coalition not by condemning members of that coalition we disagree with once and a while. Remember what our mutual leader, Ronald Reagan said, that someone who votes with us 80% of the time is our ally. Reagan won when he led an effective Center-Right/Right-Center Coalition. So did George Allen, Jim Gilmore, Bob McDonnell. Ed Gillespie is in the process of proving that a similar coalition can still be brought together.
Why is it that when somebody else says about the same thing that I do, people just love it?
When I say the same thing, I get attacked or the boot. I must admit that the bastard division of RPV is behind some of the attacks.
On a positive note, there does seem to be a lot more Brat signs than ……..
I met and asked Dave Brat questions about where he thought the economy was going 4 years ago, summer 2010. I was just what you might call an ordinary “commoner”. Still, he and another economics professor both took time to give me their opinions.
I had no idea that he was into politics. He seems to be a very down to earth person.
Your writing style may factor into it. I have to admit I often have trouble understanding what point you are trying to make.
No one here gets ‘the boot’.
Let’s add this new info to the deeds of the Establishment GOP. It’s also another example of Cantor’s continued behavior as a faux conservative, but one who likes the power of DC…BTW, digging into the voting behavior of our Virginia GOP delegation, only Hurt and Goodlatte voted ‘Aye’ for the Amendment, the other six voted ‘No’ – including Cantor. That’s what’s our Virginia delegation does when they go to DC – vote to keep slush funds, funded.
“Bill (HR 4660), which funds the Departments of Commerce and Justice, as
well as NASA and other related agencies, provides $51.202 billion in
discretionary budget authority. One
of the most important amendments that has been proposed so far is Rep.
Mike Pompeo’s (R-KS) amendment to abolish the Economic Development
Administration (EDA). The EDA is a failed Great Society program that
serves as a stimulus/pork slush fund for special interest communities
under the guise of assistance to economically distressed areas of the
country. It’s nothing more than a fund for corporate welfare and a way
of picking winners and losers in the market. It has been as successful
in creating jobs as Obama’s stimulus.
The
Pompeo amendment failed because 93 Republicans voted No along with all
187 Democrats. There were 10 Republicans and 12 Democrats that did not
vote. Here is a link to the roll call vote.
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/113-2014/h243
I have a question. If a Congressperson get a majority of phone calls from people in their district who want their Rep. to vote a certain way, what should the Rep. do?
Shouldn’t they vote the will of the people?
Not only should they, it’s their job to do so whether they like it or not. A representative’s job is to specifically represent the will of the people, and one who doesn’t is betraying his constituency.
You’re not really describing a republican government. If their job was to poll their district on every vote and vote the way >50% wanted, why have representatives at all? Why not have direct votes on every issue? We elect congressman to vote as they say they will and to use their best judgment on issues before them. Voters elect the person they think will best represent their views and their judgment, not the best secretary for tallying the votes of the individual members of their district.
Put it another way. If you’re a conservative Republican elected member of Congress, and a majority of phone calls from people in your district want you to vote to fund Planned Parenthood, do you do it? I would think you vote your conscience with the understanding that if voters disagree with your conscience, they can elect someone else next term. That’s why our congressmen have two year contracts.
Exactly.
They should vote for what they believe is “right” in keeping with their oath of office.
If their constituents don’t like it, they can remove him in two years.
Thank you.
CW
The will of the people is not understood by polling. It is understood by knowing the people that are being represented. If one is not willing to represent that will, then the motive for seeking office is, at best, tainted. If the representative’s individual opinion differs from his constituency, he should seek to use persuasion, discussion, and debate to change the will of the people.
At one time, representatives actually lived among the people they represented and knew them as people – understanding their will thus did not require polling.
If I hire a representative for a private purpose (say, a real estate agent to represent me in a purchase of land) that agent’s job is to act as my proxy. If his opinion differs from mine and I don’t agree with his arguments that my position should change, his job is to do what I ask – or step out and let someone who is willing to do so step in.
Let’s say I somehow managed to get elected to represent a far-left district in Massachusetts. Could I, in actuality, represent their will? No, because I am not in accord with that will.
Faithful representation is the heart of legitimacy of representative government.
So, by your understanding of representative government, the Republican party should not run anyone in far-left district’s in Massachusetts?
The idea of a representative as being a proxy is not really a realistic understanding of districts. If i’m you’re proxy in a real estate transaction I know exactly what you want and what your restrictions are on every element of the deal. Now imagine being a real estate proxy for 775,000 people on the same parcel of land. Maybe 51% want to give an easement to the neighbors, or maybe 51% dont. Or maybe 70% want the land to be 100 acres but a different 70% configuration of the constituents refuse to spend more more than the price of 75 acres. What’s a proxy to do?
Yours is a legitimate idea of what a representative democracy is, but it’s not the only one. I think we correctly mock politicians whose positions change with the wind. In my opinion we elect representatives to make difficult choices, not easy one. The problem with difficult choices is that their (often) unpopular. How many votes truly put long term interests ahead of short term interests? How many voters have the time or capacity to truly form well thought out, reasoned opinions on every issue? They don’t. That’s why we elect representatives.
I’m not saying that every decision should be driven by the latest passion. The representative certainly should be exercising his judgment as to how to best represent the will of the people. A statesman will have a longer term view than the typical political scoundrel, and thus would often make different decisions.
But still, the will of the people is the guiding force, the raison d’etre. Right now what we have are people who treat public office as personal property to be disposed of as they see fit.
Look at Eric Cantor and the Stock Act. Him sticking in an exception to allow his family to legally insider trade cannot be interpreted as the will of the people in any meaningful sense, neither short term nor long. It’s not a judgment error or a misassessment of the people’s will – it’s a plain and simple abuse of office to private ends.
Cantor’s behavior, sadly, is the norm in politics today, and as a result of putting up with this nonsense we have a government that is almost wholly unresponsive to the will of the people.
They stop voting the “will of the people” the minute they start thinking about the next election and getting the dough from PACs, lobbyists etc., to fight to stay in power.
Very few and I could count on my two hands who keep their base and their funds from their base close to their campaigning principles thereby voting for their base,
I’ve shared this article with some friends. One of whom came back with an excellent description of the Establishment GOP:
“There’s no money in principles and selfless service, except of course in
the sale of those principles. The GOP Establishment is the Walmart of
principles for sale, “always low prices, always.” They’ll even match
Democrat coupons.”
Eric Cantor is an imposter.
He portrays himself as a Conservative and pretends to serve the interests of his
constituents. Because he has huge financial backing from those whose special
interests he actually does serve, he is able to saturate the media with his
propaganda. He is counting on the big bucks from his big business cronies to
fool voters in Virginia’s 7th district.
Yes, Cantor is solid on Life and the 2nd amendment. But so is his challenger
Dave Brat. Cantor is counting on Conservatives to be one issue voters. As
important as these issues are (and they are important) Conservatives also care
about their pocket books, jobs, spiraling debt, out-of-control spending,
bailouts to businesses “too big to fail,” give-away wealth transfers to
multi-national corporations, crony capitalism, national sovereignty, out-of
control illegal immigration, securing our borders, amnesty for illegal aliens,
the rule of law, the education of their children, reducing the size of the
Federal leviathan, defending the Constitution and the fundamental issue of
Liberty.
On all these other issues Cantor has failed miserably.
He has repeatedly voted for raising debt limits, massive spending increases,
serial multi-billion dollar bailouts to Wall Street and foreign banks,
multi-billion dollar bailouts to failed government scam-gencies like Fannie Mae
and Freddie Mac, for TARP and most recently for the Import-Export Bank – a
monstrous wealth transfer from American taxpayers to a handful of multi-national
crony corporatists. He also voted for a billion dollar loan to the IMF for
Ukraine.
American veterans cannot get their deserved treatment at VA hospitals for lack
of doctors and adequate funding, but Cantor has no problem sending a billion
dollars of tax payer funds to a questionable regime in Ukraine with no vital US
interests at stake.
Nearly every one of Cantor’s votes and all of his behind the scenes maneuvering
on Capitol Hill are in the service of the big corporate interests who back his
campaigns. He is their tool. Beholden entirely to them.
Another demand from his corporate bosses is cheap labor. These crony capitalists
and multi -national CEO’s want endless supplies of low wage workers from around
the world. If it suits their purpose to exploit this cheap labor in foreign
countries they’ll move their operations to those countries. If it suits their
purpose to import the cheap laborers into America, they lobby Congress to keep
raising the limits of legal immigration and insist on “pathways to citizenship”
for the tens of millions of illegal aliens already here and continuing to arrive
every day. They know, as surely as Eric Cantor knows, that amnesties only invite
millions more to illegally enter the United States looking for work, because the
message they get is that they too will never be compelled to leave and they too
will receive an amnesty.
Eric Cantor now pretends to oppose amnesty, because if his real positions were
exposed very few in VA 7th district would vote for him. The facts show that
contrary to his blatant lies, Cantor has openly promoted aspects of the
so-called Dream Act, the so-called Enlist Act and various versions of the House
Republican Leadership’s “pathways to citizenship,” AKA amnesty. All those
deceptively nice sounding names seek to deceive the American public. They all
lead to amnesty for approximately twenty million foreign nationals who entered
and remain in the country illegally. Amnesty actually rewards foreigners who
break our laws, take our jobs and exploit the social safety net intended for
our own citizens.
Cantor does not work for the interests of Virginians or indeed US citizens from
anywhere across America. He is a wholly owned subsidiary of multi-national
corporate plutocrats. Virginians need a representative in Congress who will
truly represent them and their interests.
This is why voting on June 10th is so very important.
Conservatives, you are allowing RINOs to run our Party. They have been in the precinct committeeman slots in greater numbers than you. Go here to learn how to reverse that. http://theprecinctproject.wordpress.com.
But the strategy only works when enough conservatives show up and become PCs.
Thank you.
The label Republican, should have a meaning as stated below, and for some that is what it still means. For the ‘establishment’ it means staying in power no matter what the cost. I think that I will vote for Conservative and vote against Progressive no matter what other labels they may wear. That should not be a problem as most of the blue dog democrats have been thrown out of the democrat party leaving the democrats mostly progressive with the handful of power broker RINO republicans. The 7th district has the best chance in years of throwing out Eric Cantor. If you are on the sidelines watching, it’s time to get in the game. Door knock, phone bank, or place signs for Dave Brat. http://www.davebratforcongress.com is a good place to start, volunteer, make a difference.
Here’s a link to the Precinct Project, which is an ongoing strategy to turn around the Republican Party from the bottom up – through Republicans/libertarians running and occupying precinct committee posts, and through this representation move upward to put conservatives in charge of party leadership.
The Precinct Project
Thank you Mike for publishing this article. A lot of the newly minted Tea Party activist have never heard this part of the state’s Republican history. It seems that the Thomas, Bolling, McDonnell, Marcus, Cantor, Cobb, Davis, contingent are today called the usual suspects. Until we purge them from RPV we will be expending more energy fighting them than fighting the Progressive agenda that is ruining the country we love.
Little did I know when I joined the Republican Party that I would be expending so much energy fighting this rear guard action of either Progressive plants or power hungry individuals who see the RPV as a quick and easy way to power and control.
I am not interested in electing individuals whose only connection to Conservative Principles is the “R” behind their name. If that is all they can show me, I will not be supporting them.
“In a two-party system, purity is the enemy of victory,” Barbour said. “Never forget that the purpose of winning is to govern. And never forget, you have to be a big party before you can win elections.”
http://news.yahoo.com/barbour-faces-off-tea-party-gop-conference-212823991–election.html
No word on whether Barbour drove to the conference in one of those famous green cars built in Ole Miss.
Well stated Mr. Giere! Sometimes I feel like we’re are fighting the “uniparty.”
Wouldn’t it be nice to participate in politics without having to constantly fight AGAINST the leadership of your own party?
The Libertarian Party is waiting for you with open arms. So, when you’re ready to fight the statists WITH people who really mean it when they stand for limited government and individual rights, come see us.
The Libertarian Party has absolutely no influence in Washington DC or Richmond. As a Libertarian, and as someone who used to only vote Libertarian, I would like to explain the reason why I can no longer do so. The problems we face are extreme and palpable. The only way to challenge the Democrats is to take over the other establishment. That is the Republican Party. Do you believe that there is honestly a way that they LP can challenge the status quo? I’d love to hear it, get behind it, and fight for it.
I was an actual official LP party member about 20 years ago. Unfortunately, the Libertarian Party has never been diligent about doing the actual logistical work it would need to do to become a strong contender. After seeing more fundraising appeals then progress towards any defined objectives, I realized that it was not serious about being a political force. Nothing that has happened in 2 decades since has changed that opinion in any way.
Ms. Bank, the problem is not the Libertarian Party, or as you suggest, some lack of seriousness, or unwillingness to do the tedious ground work. The problem is the two-party system. It has been carefully built over the decades to keep out potential challengers, and insulate [R] and [D] from real competition. The winner-takes-all electoral method creates a spoiler effect that keeps people away from third parties even when that third choice is technically available to them. A conservative voter can’t choose a Libertarian or Independent candidate without risking a Democrat win. A liberal/socialist voter can’t select a Green Party challenger without risking a Republican win. The public is thus pigeonholed into always having to go with a Republican or Democrat.
So long as this system is allowed to persist, it is illegitimate to blame the Libertarian Party because it hasn’t yet managed to topple and replace the Republican Party, or even to have significant electoral success. We already know the real reason for its trouble getting off the ground: the spoiler effect. And it’s not just at the ballot box. The same applies to fundraising, and amassing volunteers. Very few people are willing to contribute their time to what is seemingly a lost cause. Fewer still are willing to donate their hard-earned money to a candidate that has little or no chance of winning the seat.
People have a hard time thinking long-term when it comes to politics. They are only concerned about the next immediate election, rather than a larger strategy. Ms. Bank, I’ve been a libertarian for over 20 years myself, and I know full well the problems we face. But the same criticism you level at the Libertarian Party can be said of the Republican Party. In terms of stopping the socialist agenda, and scaling back government, and decentralizing power, team [R] has been a complete failure. And I consider its failure to be much worse, given that its elected officials HAVE been in a position to make these much-needed reforms, but have proven themselves to be either unable or unwilling to follow through.
Another invitation to leave the Republican party. How nice. It seems to be working as disenchantment with the party continues to grow.
It’s ridiculous that but for the complete incompetence of the Libertarian Party as an organization, he would have a compelling argument.
It is sober analysis such as this that will bolster and strengthen the true conservative movement. Without vision the people perish. Thank you, Mr. Giere. Keep it up!
Mike, I’ve been making this argument for years. I think a majority of Virginia Republicans are coming to the conclusion that the Corporatists, aka “Compassionate Conservatives”, aka Business-Friendly Republicans, aren’t Republicans. Let’s look at the Republican Creed that Dr. Dave Brat has been running on:
1. That the free enterprise system is the most productive supplier of human needs and economic justice,
2. That all individuals are entitled to equal rights, justice, and
opportunities and should assume their responsibilities as citizens in a
free society,
3. That fiscal responsibility and budgetary restraints must be exercised at all levels of government,
4. That the Federal Government must preserve individual liberty by observing Constitutional limitations,
5. That peace is best preserved through a strong national defense,
6. That faith in God, as recognized by our Founding Fathers is essential to the
moral fiber of the Nation.
Is this the Republican Party of Bob Goodlatte and Eric Cantor? Is this the Republican Party of George W. Bush, Bob Dole, John McCain, Mitt Romney, Karl Rove?
Of course not. Even libertarians like myself could get behind a Republican Party that stuck to the creed listed above.
The best-kept secret in politics is that a Republican Party which actually honors its own platform is almost completely libertarian in character. Hard to find a difference between the GOP platform and what liberty activists want. Much easier to find differences between that platform and what too many elected Republicans actually do.
Alexis, exactly. Though I am excited to see how many libertarian and constitutional activists are fighting to take on Eric Cantor in the 7th District. I wish Anthony Riedel, a Ron Paul Campaign activist, would have gotten the same traction.