Tuesday, January 27, 2009

James Bopp Speaks on RNC Chair Race

In an email letter to fellow RNC members (available at Marc Ambinder's blog here), Indiana committeeman James Bopp has spoken about the RNC race for the first time since his Conservative Steering Committee initiative.

He doesn't endorse anyone, but his dislike of Michael Steele could not be more clear:

Recent news accounts of the RNC Chairman's race have focused on whether Michael Steele is or should be the conservative choice. Sean Hannity thinks so, and so does Lisa Cheney, who I recently found out, to my surprise, is not Dick Cheney's daughter. But others have their doubts. The Politico recently ran an article about Michael Steele's candidacy for RNC Chairman where Kim Lehman and Steve Scheffler, NCW and NCM from Iowa, expressed concern about Mr. Steele's candidacy because of his involvement with the Republican Leadership Council.

I share this concern. When Mr. Steele first called me about his candidacy for RNC Chairman, I asked him about his involvement in the Republican Leadership Council. He said he got involved because of his friendship with Christie Todd Whitman and left because he need to spend more time with GOPAC. He said that if he is unsuccessful in his quest to be RNC Chairman, because of his involvement with the RLC, "so be it." My impression from this conversation was that the Mr. Steele's involvement in the Republican Leadership Council was casual and innocent.

As a result, I went to the RLC website to see what I could find. I was already aware of Whitman's hostility to social conservatives, as well as co-founder John Danforth's. What I found was over a dozen pages on the RLC's website that detailed his extensive involvement with RLC that made it plain that Steele's involvement in the group was not what I understood. You cannot go to their website now, however, and find out about this. Sometime in early December, the RLC's website was scrubbed of Steele's involvement. He is no longer listed as being a Co-Chairman or a Co-Founder, as having make fundraising trips, or as having resigned. All this information is now down Orwell's 1984 memory hole. Fortunately, I copied all the relevant pages at the time and some of the other pages can still be found on the web.

I have no problem with meeting and talking to anyone, because I believe that honest dialogue is a healthy and necessary step in unifying the RNC behind its next Chairman. In addition, I do not doubt the sincerity of Michael's pro-life beliefs. He has a public record of support for the pro-life cause which I appreciate. Furthermore, I am very impressed by Mr. Steele's success in overcoming personal and political challenges to become Maryland's Lt. Governor and by his obvious communication skills.

My concern is that we need a RNC Chairman who is able to unify all branches of the conservative movement within the RNC. Unfortunately, there are those who want to divide the conservative movement by pitting fiscal conservatives against social conservatives, and ultimately to drive social conservatives out of the Republican Party. I count Christie Todd Whitman and John Danforth in that group. They founded the Republican Leadership Council to wrestle "control" of the Party away from "social fundamentalist." That Michael Steele helped start this group, and actively supported it, means he was at least willing to aid and abet this cause.

Unfortunately, none of Steele's subsequently explanations about his involvement in the RLC satisfactorily explains it and some explanations are contradicted by the facts. Furthermore, the scrubbing of RLC's website of Steele's involvement is deeply troubling in itself.

Bopp then goes on, at length with url citations (among other things) to document his concerns and make his case. Read the whole thing for yourself; it's a compelling argument.

Bopp concludes by taking exception to Steele's dislike for his Conservative Steering Committee (and, more broadly, he makes the case for Steele's hostility to social conservatives more generally):

At the RNC special meeting on January 7th, Betsy Werronen, NCW DC, asked the RNC Chairman candidates, as the RNC Chairman, "would you stop (the conservative steering committee) from continuing to meet?" Steele answered "[w]hen I am elected as the RNC Chairman, I will stop this group from meeting again."

Whatever one thinks about the need for conservative RNC members to meet or the practical possibility that an RNC Chairman could actually stop RNC members from meeting when they want to, Steele's commitment to ban conservatives from meeting raises several concerns. First, it is highly divisive. There just could not be a more divisive policy by an RNC Chairman than he is entitled to police if and when RNC members can meet together when they want to. Second, free association for political purposes is an essential part of our First Amendment rights. That Steele would want to violate that right raised questions about his commitment to bedrock conservative principles. And, finally, it is consistent with his involvement in the RLC. That Steele would devote his time and effort and lend his reputation to a group that is hostile to social conservatives is certainly consistent with wanting to ban them from meeting at the RNC.

I blogged about James Bopp and the Conservative Steering Committee here, here, here, and here.
At the end, Bopp makes his objects to Steele clear, but does not take a definitive position in support of another candidate:

Steele's involvement with the RLC ultimately raises a serious concern about his commitment to bringing unity among the members of the RNC. My goal is to unite all conservatives, social, fiscal and national defense, behind the Republican Party, and to unite all members of the Republican party behind our next Chairman. Steele's involvement in the RLC and his subsequent commitment to stop conservatives from meeting suggests that he will be unwilling and unable to do so.

Fortunately, there are other conservative candidates that I believe can unite the party. Saul Anuzis, Ken Blackwell, Katon Dawson and Mike Duncan are conservatives who want to unify, not divide, the conservative movement. They each bring their own unique combination of talents, experience, and perspectives on the future of the RNC. They deserve our support.

This took me by surprise; when I saw that Mr. Bopp had put forward a letter, I figured that it might contain an endorsement (rather than merely a very well-made "anybody but Michael Steele" argument). Even so, I'm not disappointed. His letter and his position now put his involvement in the creation of the Conservative Steering Committee in something of a different light (much more of an "anybody-but-Steele" light than a "pro-Duncan" light).