This is slightly older news, but there is a group of conservatives who serve on the Republican National Committee who indentified ten key policy positions they would like to see 2010 candidates who receive money from the RNC hold (they have to agree with at least seven), they are:
(1) We support smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes by opposing bills like Obama’s "stimulus" bill;
(2) We support market-based health care reform and oppose Obama-style government run healthcare;
(3) We support market-based energy reforms by opposing cap and trade legislation;
(4) We support workers’ right to secret ballot by opposing card check;
(5) We support legal immigration and assimilation into American society by opposing amnesty for illegal immigrants;
(6) We support victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges;
(7) We support containment of Iran and North Korea, particularly effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat;
(8) We support retention of the Defense of Marriage Act;
(9) We support protecting the lives of vulnerable persons by opposing health care rationing, denial of health care and government funding of abortion; and
(10) We support the right to keep and bear arms by opposing government restrictions on gun ownership; and be further
RESOLVED, that a candidate who disagrees with three or more of the above stated public policy positions of the Republican National Committee, as identified by the voting record, public statements and/or signed questionnaire of the candidate, shall not be eligible for financial support and endorsement by the Republican National Committee.
I think something like this, if adopted, would avoid the boondoggle that the RNC found itself in with the New York 23rd Congressional district race. Iowa’s National Committeeman, Steve Scheffler, is a sponsor and Iowa’s National Committeewoman, Kim Lehman also supports it.
Kim Lehman explained to Radio Iowa’s O. Kay Henderson that this gives a tool to Chairman Michael Steele as well:
(RNC) Chairman Steele is faced with supporting candidates that call themselves Republicans, but don’t have the values of the Republicans so it’s caused some branding issues for the Republican Party and it’s also problematic for other Republicans as we try to rebuild this party to act upon its mission statement, which is in the platform…
…We’re a conservative party. We represent conservative issues and we stand and vote conservative, and then there’s these rogue people that call themselves Republicans… And I think the objective of the resolution is to clarify, for the sake of the chairman, that we don’t feel obligated to put our financial support behind you.
It makes sense that if you want Republican endorsements and Republican money that you are… well, Republican. We’ll see if common sense wins the day.
Latest posts by Shane Vander Hart (see all)
- Dr. R.C. Sproul (1939-2017) - December 14, 2017
- There’s No Such Thing as a “Nonstraight Christian” - December 14, 2017
- Politics and Our Christian Witness - December 13, 2017