Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bush Employing Platform Shoos to Keep Party in Line [pro-life alert]
Sun Times/NY Post ^ | August 5, 2004 | Bob Novak

Posted on 08/11/2004 2:41:51 PM PDT by firebrand

With the Republican National Convention's platform committee convening in New York less than three weeks from now, no draft platform exists, no subcommittees have been named, and no special lodging for committee members has been assigned. Rather than signifying sudden collapse of accustomed Republican efficiency, all this looks more like a coolly calculated plan.

The suspicion has grown that President Bush's re-election strategists--Karl Rove and Karen Hughes--do not want the open debate over principles and policy that has characterized Republican platform-making for a generation. The carefully guarded Bush campaign game plan is to present delegates on the platform committee with an unpleasant surprise when they arrive in New York: a trimmed down document with virtually no time to debate it.

Thus, Republicans would replicate the pablum platform that Democrats, abandoning an older tradition of fierce policy struggles, quietly adopted in Boston last week. But the White House may be playing with fire. While Democrats were manipulated to embrace a meaningless document, Republican delegates accustomed to vigorous debate have not been conditioned.

For more than a quarter of a century, Republican platforms have been forged in an intense debate, often against the presidential candidate's wishes. The pattern was set in 1976, when Sen. Jesse Helms led Reagan forces against President Gerald Ford. In 1984, when Ronald Reagan was seeking re-election, then House Republican Whip Trent Lott as platform chairman resisted White House efforts to equivocate on taxes and abortion. In 1996, Rep. Henry Hyde of Illinois threatened to resign as chairman if candidate Bob Dole interfered.

In 2000, platform chairman Tommy Thompson (then governor of Wisconsin but looking for a federal Cabinet post) was subservient to the Bush campaign but did not forestall the customary debate. As usual, platform committee members who are ordinary citizens challenged members of Congress and other professional politicians.

The 2004 chairman, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, always was expected to be even more the campaign's agent than Thompson. His chairmanship has been notable for what has not happened: no outreach to interest groups in the broad Republican coalition, no subcommittees appointed and, most significantly, no draft platform prepared for committee action. Committee members have not even been informed of where they are staying in New York.

Old hands at platform-building have been cut out this time. Former congressional staffer William Gribbin, who has written all the party's national platforms dating back to 1980, was not invited. The hope for a substantive platform was the selection as the executive director of Jay Lefkowitz, White House policy chief for the first three years of the Bush administration. But he was dropped when he declined to resign from his Washington law-lobbying firm.

The slow pace of platform-building may be attributed to Frist's preoccupation with being majority leader, but a more devious explanation is confirmed by the apparent schedule. In recent years, platform committee members arrive on Sunday night the week before the convention and are then given the platform draft. The usual Sunday night reception has been canceled, and committee members expect to get the documents Monday morning. Actually, they will not start until Tuesday, leaving little time for consideration before approving it Thursday.

The Democrats at least went through the charade of an open drafting committee session, which was totally controlled by the Kerry campaign. But the Bush campaign appears to be readying the platform committee with a fait accompli. If they are given the antiseptic document that appears likely, an explosion may occur in New York.

A platform executive director was finally named last week: Washington lobbyist Anne Phelps, an ex-White House aide who before that was Frist's chief health adviser. Newly appointed platform communications director Ginny Wolfe, another former Frist aide, started her stint at the platform committee this week by being supremely uncommunicative to this column.

What the Bush campaign seems to be building is what one veteran GOP operative told us is ''the antithesis of traditional Republican platforms. After all, when you're proud of your positions, and confident of their rightness, you want to explain them. When you're afraid to talk about them, well . . .''


TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: abortionlist; afraid; afraidofthepress; bush43; election; eunuchs; gop; gutlessgop; notestosterone; novak; pansies; politics; prolife; rncplatform; wimps
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-48 next last
Although this column does not say the pro-life plank will be removed, "trimmed down" doesn't sound good. The committee might not change the plank; they might just eliminate it.

There are two big reasons to worry about this: (1) We don't want the pro-life plank to be eliminated because of the damage this would do to the pro-life cause; (2) if this happens, Bush will lose his base and lose the election.

The RNCLife has sent out an e-mail alert about this column. Here are the people to contact to make sure the pro-life plank stays in the platform:

Bill Frist (chairman of the Platform Committee): 202-224-3135

Melissa Hart (vice chairman): 202-225-2565

Governor Bill Owens of Colorado (vice chairman): 303-866-2471

Anne Phelps (executive director): 212-356-2558

Ed Gillespie (chairman of the RNC): 202-863-8700

1 posted on 08/11/2004 2:41:54 PM PDT by firebrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Coleus

Please ping your pro-life list?


2 posted on 08/11/2004 2:43:36 PM PDT by firebrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: firebrand

I'm certainly against the complete elimination of the pro-life plank... HOWEVER, it seems to me that the overriding strategic priority is judicial reform. Without it, a pro-life platform is essentially meaningless because of its unenforceability. So if Bush & Co. are proposing a more "inclusive" platform with this strategic goal in mind, I'm not sure I'd be totally against it. I'd have to see it to be sure.


3 posted on 08/11/2004 2:45:36 PM PDT by mcg1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: firebrand

Ummm... I saw nothing in this article about pro-life issues. Furthermore, Bush has impeccable pro-life credentials. If the platform is written by his people, it will have a strong pro-life plank.


4 posted on 08/11/2004 2:49:33 PM PDT by CA Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CA Conservative
Well, the Republican National Coalition for Life seemed pretty concerned about it, and sent out an e-mail to all the delegates.

By the way Rep. Melissa Hart and Governor Bill Owens are co-chairmen, not vice chairmen, I saw when I looked at the RNCLife e-mail again.

5 posted on 08/11/2004 2:52:59 PM PDT by firebrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: firebrand

Squelching of debate is always a cause for concern.


6 posted on 08/11/2004 2:54:33 PM PDT by Canticle_of_Deborah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: firebrand

Well, without some specific examples of "trimming" the pro-life plank, from credible sources, I am going to give the President the benefit of the doubt here. Despite the perpetual handwringing that goes on around here, I have never seen any evidence that Bush is anthing less than committed to the pro-life cause.


7 posted on 08/11/2004 2:56:18 PM PDT by CA Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Canticle_of_Deborah

I have heard rumors of a big fight, bigger than usual, by those who are opposed to the life plank. "Trimming down" the platform may be an attempt to head this debate off at the pass. But it is much better for the cause AND for Bush to have the plank in there.


8 posted on 08/11/2004 2:57:51 PM PDT by firebrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: CA Conservative

Bush is fine on the pro-life cause. He MAY be taking the wrong tactic here. Everyone considers Novak to be very reliable.


9 posted on 08/11/2004 2:58:57 PM PDT by firebrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Canticle_of_Deborah

"Squelching of debate is always a cause for concern."

If Bush loses because of it, the debate will be about why he lost. The debate will be how life can be protected under and Kerry Adminsistration!


10 posted on 08/11/2004 3:01:17 PM PDT by Smartaleck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: firebrand
I have heard rumors of a big fight, bigger than usual, by those who are opposed to the life plank. "Trimming down" the platform may be an attempt to head this debate off at the pass. But it is much better for the cause AND for Bush to have the plank in there.

Isn't it just as likely that the effort to give the delegates a completed platform is to head off any attempts to remove or water down the pro-life plank? Why do you insist on presuming the worst about a president who has repeatedly proven his dedication to the cause of life?

11 posted on 08/11/2004 3:02:36 PM PDT by CA Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: CA Conservative
I was alarmed when I first read Novak's column, because abortion v. life is the elephant in the living room and I had heard about stiff opposition coming this year at the platform debates.

Then it turned out the folks at the RNCLife had had the same concerns. I wouldn't have posted this if those steadfast champions of the unborn had not had the same reaction I did.

12 posted on 08/11/2004 3:07:02 PM PDT by firebrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: firebrand
For the last 25 years, the GOP party platform has shown both the principle and conviction of its members. The GOP is the pro-life party in America today. If the GOP platform no longer contains a pro-life plank, Republican leadership will be making a huge mistake. Such an action might not impact conservative voters this general election cycle, but next time around, conservatives will remember.

Abortion is one of the great issues of our time. It's a key issue for most Republicans and one that clearly defines and differentiates the GOP from the Democratic Party.

13 posted on 08/11/2004 3:07:27 PM PDT by Reagan Man (.....................................................The Choice is Clear....... Re-elect BUSH-CHENEY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cacique; kphockey2; RaceBannon; Tabi Katz; Corsica Bella

pro-life ping


14 posted on 08/11/2004 3:10:02 PM PDT by firebrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man

This sounds like dissention in the ranks will not be permitted. I'm not sure if that's good for the party in the long term.


15 posted on 08/11/2004 3:11:35 PM PDT by Alcibiades (I wanted a good tagline and all I got was this lousy T-Shirt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Alcibiades
Dissention? RIGHT!

What part of, "The GOP is the pro-life party in America today", don't you understand?

16 posted on 08/11/2004 3:18:31 PM PDT by Reagan Man (.....................................................The Choice is Clear....... Re-elect BUSH-CHENEY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Iowa Granny

ping


17 posted on 08/11/2004 3:20:28 PM PDT by prairiebreeze (sKerry is a sKunk!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: firebrand
But it is much better for the cause AND for Bush to have the plank in there.

I agree and support the pro-life stand 100%. I just worry about the overall implications of shutting down debate.

18 posted on 08/11/2004 3:30:41 PM PDT by Canticle_of_Deborah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Canticle_of_Deborah

Knowing the pro-aborts, it would be polite to call what they do debating. But in theory you are right. That's another side to it.


19 posted on 08/11/2004 3:41:26 PM PDT by firebrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man

Hey, I'm all for the pro-life plank being in the platform. What I meant was other issues like campaign-finance or the out of control gov't spending. They are suppressing all dissention on all issues.


20 posted on 08/11/2004 3:43:01 PM PDT by Alcibiades (I wanted a good tagline and all I got was this lousy T-Shirt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-48 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson