THE FUTURE OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY IN ILLINOIS

Lately I have been talking with my good friend and fellow Republican Robert Klein Engler about the future of the Republican Party. Now with our Governor being arrested, wouldn't be nice to have a Republican Party who could move in and take the lead? Yeah, it would be nice, but the Republican Party in Illinois is so screwed up I am ashamed to even talk about it. They are just as corrupt as Blago!

Anyway, Robert is a gifted writer and a professor in the Chicago Colleges. I want to share with you his thoughts about "The Future of the Republican Party"

OAK PARK, IL--State politicians and pundits are now discussing the future of the Republican Party in Illinois. This discussion assumes there was a real Republican Party in the state to start with, and that what ever is left of that party after the recent election has a future.

It is dirty business, Illinois politics, but someone has to do it. Because of this dirt, Illinois Republicans have to face the fact the party has housecleaning to do. This housecleaning means mending relationships within the party and then placing principles and what is good for Illinois before private, political interests.

An outsider, writing on the blog ADVANCE INDIANA, may say it best. Comparing two recent U. S. Illinois senators he writes, "The key difference between Sen. Fitzgerald and Sen. Obama is that the latter always took the path of least resistance in pursuit of his political career, while the former never swayed from his core principles."

He continues, "Sen. Obama's go along to get along positioning has won him big support from Chicago power brokers like Gov. Rod Blagoyevich, Chicago Mayor Richard Daley and Cook County Board President Todd Stroger. Sen. Fitzgerald's independence earned him the wrath of former Illinois Gov. George Ryan, House Speaker Dennis Hastert and GOP power broker William Cellini."

Two events in the past have special significance for the future of the Republican Party in Illinois. One is the long standing relation of the Republicans with the Democrats that make for what is called by "John Kass' well used phrase, 'the Illinois Combine.'"

This "Combine" relationship has been so incestuous at times that the Republican Party was seen not in competition with the Democrats, but as a complement to them. This complementary relationship becomes clear when we think about what is the difference between ex-governor George Ryan (a Republican) and present governor Rod Blagojevich (a Democrat). One is in prison and the other may be heading to prison, soon.

The Combine may have worked well for the politicians who were scratching one another's backs, but it does not give voters who were looking for an alternative to Democrat corruption and big government a clear choice. If there is a future to the Republican Party in Illinois, than the party must clearly state its opposition to the corruption of the Democrats.

One has to wonder if voters downstate really want a Democrat royalty in Chicago dictating their politics. When Daley I leads to Daley II, and Madigan I leads to Madigan II and Stroger I leads to Stroger II, the people of Illinois suffer as orphans.

The other past event of importance for the future of Republicans in Illinois was the election two years ago for U. S. Senator that launched Barack Obama on the path to become President. Some have maintained that when Barack Obama becomes President you can blame Illinois Republicans for it.

If Illinois Republican party leaders could not foresee the consequence of removing Jack Ryan as a candidate and bring in Alan Keyes, why are they still party leaders, today? In the Senate election of 2004, Obama defeated Keyes by 70 percent to 27 percent of the vote. Does Illinois need another example like this of their political sagacity?

One version of the story goes like this: Alan Keyes was officially decided by a vote of the Illinois Republican Party State Central committee. Jim Oberweis (the second place primary finisher) was offered the spot, but he placed three preconditions on his acceptance: a financial commitment from the Illinois Republican Party, an endorsement by President Bush and a commitment that the President campaign in the state for Oberweis. Since the IRPSC committee couldn't guarantee the last two, there wasn't any deal and Oberweis refused to run.

There are no doubt other versions of the Alan Keys/Jack Ryan affair. The point is the cobwebs have to be dusted off and the Republican party has to understand that the events that lead to the rise of Barack Obama were not good for the party or the voters of Illinois.

We see what all this maneuvering by the so-called "extreme right-wing conservative county GOP chairmen" and others has gotten us. It seems to many that Jim Oberweis would have been a better candidate than Alan Keyes, no matter what. Failing that, there must have been another son of Illinois who could have run and not look like a carpetbagger. What were they thinking?

The muddled thinking that surrounded the Jack Ryan issue is also reflected in the Republican's response to the issue of illegal immigration.

Elections are about numbers. In Illinois, amnesty and a path to citizenship add numbers to the Democrat Party, not to the Republican Party. Republicans in Illinois seem to be just now waking up to the Democratic plan that turns illegal immigrants into voters by advancing la raza.

In the last U. S. presidential election, about forty percent of the Latino vote went to President Bush. The data suggest it was even less for Senator McCain in the recent presidential election. THE NATION reports, "Seventy-four percent of Latinos voted for Obama in California, 65 percent in Virginia and 72 percent in Illinois. Latinos provided the winning margin in Indiana, with 77 percent.

Even if you believe that some elite Republicans could never put patriotism before profits, they will have to do something soon to enforce our immigration laws if they intend to remain in office. If the Republicans hope to be the political party of principles, the party of action and not resignation, then they must advance a four point agenda in regard to illegal immigration.

Even though Illinois is not a boarder state, the Republican agenda should have secure borders as its first point. In Ann Coulter's words, we should begin to act towards Mexico "Like a nation and not like a department store."

After the border is secure, we should begin a slow, certain and ever growing deportation of illegal immigrants. This can be combined with discouraging the use of cheap and illegal immigrant labor by the corporate sponsors of the Republican Party.

Finally, we should recruit more African-Americans. It is worth repeating, the Republican Party in Illinois is the party of Abraham Lincoln.

We do not need new legislation to accomplish this immigration agenda. What we need is political leadership and the political will to enforce current immigration laws. A recent Zogby poll concluded that most Americans want our immigration laws enforced. Asking for this in Illinois is not swimming against the tide.

Eighty-one percent of Americans believe that local and state police should help federal authorities enforce laws against illegal immigration. Yet, in spite of these numbers, Democrats in Chicago insist on keeping their sanctuary city policy, a policy that has nothing to do with law enforcement but a lot to do with votes.

Political commentator Tom Roeser argues that Republicans can regain ground again if they become more conservative. That makes sense, but how do you do that in Illinois when Republicans seem afraid to be smart conservatives? Let's face it, picking Alan Keyes to run against Obama was just plain dumb.

An appeal to Reagan Democrats and the Catholic Church may be a smarter way to win elections. Yet, who knows what are the political motives of the Catholic Church? Francis Cardinal George of Chicago came out with a statement essentially condemning Barack Obama's position on the FOCA and abortion, but that statement came AFTER the election.

Facing bad press from a sex scandal, hoping for illegal immigrants to fill up the pews, and being by reason of a valid theology pro-life, the Catholic Church in Illinois seems pulled in many directions.

It should be noted, too, "There was an ethnic dimension to Obama's choice among Catholics. While white Catholics narrowly chose McCain over Obama, 52 to 47 percent, Hispanics, who are mostly Catholic, chose the Illinois senator 67 to 31 percent, the Pew forum reported."

If they want to, the Church may be able to pull the Reagan Democrats into the Republican camp. That could be especially true in the collar counties around Chicago. Many of those who fled the inner city to live in the suburbs made accessible by expressways still have allegiances to the church.

Some in the Illinois Log Cabin Republicans look at Catholic Church involvement in politics differently. They argue the Church is too political. A source said "I don't have any idea about why they continue to be so overtly political. Their involvement in the Prop 8 "Hate" campaign in California is also very unfortunate--and they aren't being helpful in Illinois regarding our equality and civil unions."

There is common ground here in spite of disagreements. Isn't it possible to open a dialogue where support for overturning Roe v Wade is exchanged for support for civil unions in Illinois? The single issue of lower taxes can at least bring these various factions together with a common interest.

The reason Democrats win elections in Illinois is because they get more votes. Republicans can run as conservatives while at the same time attracting votes. Other core issues besides abortion like lower taxes, limited government, an end to Affirmative Action, and stopping illegal immigration may all be made attractive to voters if they are explained properly.

Republicans must also bring reform minded Democrats into the party, Democrats who are not part of the Combine. Has anyone ever approached Forrest Claypool to become a new Republican? It is beyond me why he continues to remain in the Democrat Party, when many of his proposals for the Cook County Board are proposals Republicans could support.

Conservatives must win back territory, especially down state. Getting back votes Republicans used to have means admitting, as one commentator wrote in the ILLINOIS REVIEW, "Corn and soybeans don't vote." Take for example Macon County. Here the vote was 50% for Obama and 49% for McCain. That loss could be accounted for by chance. A gain of 2% could have meant victory in this election.

The same could be said for McClean County or Coles County where it was 51% Obama, 48% McCain. Even Sagamon County, where Obama won by 51%, and where the state capitol in Springfield is located, could be an easy pickup. Figures like this tell us again and again that Republicans in Illinois do not want to win elections with conservative ideas.

The collar counties around Chicago present another problem. That population may be drawn into the orbit of the corrupt Chicago Democrats for some time to come. A good plan is to gradually isolate the Chicago Democrats by recapturing territory in the rest of the state.

Why is it that when many Illinois residents go to the polls to vote they are given a ballot that often has only a Democrat running for an office? Can't the Republicans find enough people to make sure for every election there is a Republican candidate running for every office?

Not to do so, gives the impression that the Republican Party is more interested in keeping to themselves a private club than offering voters an alternative and winning elections. Most voters are naturally conservative. They should be given a chance to vote for conservatives, or at least Republican candidates, across the board.

THE REPUBLIC OF BILOXI webpage echoes my arguments. "Change will have to come with hard work and commitment, not platitudes. The first step forward is for the Illinois Republican Party to get rid of Chairman Andy McKenna and adopt a strategy wherein they can actually compete."

"Stop looking for self-funding candidates and look for people with ideas; support them and help them build a grass roots organization... Offer real opposition for as many races as possible."

There are thousands of voters in Illinois who are tired of the corrupt politics coming out of Chicago and radiating like a dark sun across the state. They look for an alternative to nepotism, cronyism and socialism. The Republican Party in Illinois has a choice, either change and offer voters a real alternative to Democrats, or disappear.

Republicans can win elections again in Illinois if they do at least five things: Remain true to core conservative principles, especially the issue of lower taxes, openly confront the issue of illegal immigration and its impact on Illinois, attract new members to the party, especially the Reagan Democrats and reform minded Democrats, regain lost territory on the county level in order to isolate the Chicago Democrats, and run candidates in every election for every office. It's worth a try. Republicans have nothing to lose except elections.

“Yeah, it would be nice, but the Republican Party in Illinois is so screwed up I am ashamed to even talk about it. They are just as corrupt as Blago!”

Hey, I was born in Chicago, and raised in the suburbs where I now still live (DuPage County, still mostly a bastion of conservatism). The whole Pub Party is NOT corrupt. The problem w/the Pub Party in IL is that it is split in half between the RINO’s and the Conservatives. Of late, when a conservative Pub runs in the primaries, the RINO’s make sure to get another alleged conservative Pub to run also, thus watering down the conservative vote and the RINO wins the primaries. As long as our Party in IL remains continually split between the Rockefeller Pub types and the social Conservatives, we will not win again.

Gov. Jim Edgar was the only Pub Gov who managed to bridge the two parts of the Party, and governed our State very well. It was because he was fiscally very responsible. Now our coffers are bankrupt, and the majority Dem rule is ruining our State. But the Pubs are so busy fighting each other now that the future looks bleak unless we can somehow come up with a consensus candidate that appeals to both wings of our Party. That ain’t easy.

Long but good read. This last paragraph says it all. Here in Ogle County we're pretty Republican but it's getting tighter. Lot's of immigrants (need I say illegals?) are tipping the balance more and more. Still, our state representatives as well as our Congressional House rep. remain Republican.

A personal aside: I've wondered in the past whether I'm a distant relation to lt. governor Pat Quinn. He's from Oak Park. I was born and raised until 11 years old in Oak Park and had relatives named Quinn (my mother's relative married into the family) living in Oak Park. But the Quinn family move to around Rockton about the same time, or before, that we moved to SE Wisconsin (1955). My genealogy work does not show a Patrick Quinn in that family line, but the Oak Park coincidence is intriguing. Who knows? I don't.

Anyway, if there is to be a special election for Obama's seat, the Illinois Republican Party should first work to insure the candidates are viable alternatives to Chicago/Cook County machine politics. Not just the one the Republicans may put forward, but the Democrat candidate as well. Then, the party needs to begin rebuilding itself instead of wallowing in defeatism as it has these past few years. THIS is the opportunity to begin that transformation. If we don't take advantage of it now then the party is indeed doomed.

>> “I also live in DuPage County which USED to be conservative but went mostly for Barry this time around.” No it didn’t. Where the heck did you hear that from? <<

DuPage county went to Obama by about 54%. If you don't believe this, feel free to go to USElectionAtlas.org or CNN Election 2008 page, click on "Illinois" and select election results by county.

Well, now that I think about it, social conservatives never liked McCain and probably stayed home or didn’t vote for him in particular. Illinois was a lost cause anyway as it is Obamaland, so conservatives in DuPage Country probably didn’t even bother. I almost didn’t, as I never liked McCain. Too many people moving into DuPage from Chicago probably also. However, our County Board remains predominantly Pub, which makes me think lots of conservatives didn’t pull the lever for McCain while voting for other conservatives.

I live in Northfield, and I think that McCain is too liberal. If I thought that the election would have been close, in Illinois, I would have voted for McCain, since I didn’t want to help split the anti-Obama vote, helping him win Illinois’ 21 electoral votes, with about 49% of the popular vote. In Oct., I predicted that Obama would win 57%-58%, in IL, so I voted for Chuck Baldwin, of the Constitution Party.

I've read this article three times and something seems to be missing in regards to the IL GOPs problems -- Bob Kjellander.

We all know 'KJ' right? No?
IIRC he was the guy who worked with Blago on that bond deal that just happened to line KJ's own pockets with MILLIONS in *finders fees* (heeeeeeeellooo Combine).

Or this 'KJ', who is Karl Rove's Best friend, and who both decided that those 'extremist' conservatives were ruining the IL GOP and must be purged. Especially that dam Senator Peter Fitzgerald. That sob was just too conservative and too independent and wouldn't play footsie with the White House dammit!

If that 'KJ' doesn't ring a bell, then there's THIS KJ -- the KJ that just happened to be appointed as Treasurer of the 2008 RNC Convention. No I'm not kidding KJ was Treasurer. Well he does have experience handling Big Money so that must have been it. Being Karl Rove's Best Friend had nooooothing to do with it.

So until KJ is gone, in prison (he IS mentioned in the Rezko indictments for that *finders fee*) or otherwise, the IL GOP will NOT change. The Combine will rule, the IL GOP will be filled with corrupt RINOs, and we'll be wandering in the desert for forty years.

(just my 2¢)

We need to throw out McKenna and rebuild this damn thing. As for the Senate seat our best chance of winning is Mark Kirk, before you scream RINO, I've talked to the guy he is military man and is our best chance of winning hands down. I would rather have him ANYDAY than Jesse Jackson Jr. or one of the other crooks on Blago's list.

And as another FReeper emailed me earlier, no more Oberweis, Keyes, Cox and the rest of the tools who couldn't win a city dog catcher's race.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.