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 previous 1-2021-4041-48 next last
To: Canticle_of_Deborah

Agreed. I think a lot of pro-lifers tend to lack a bit of strategic perspective here. The goal is to END ABORTION, it is NOT to have a plank in the RNC platform. The plank is important, of course, but it is largely symbolic and unenforceable AT THIS POINT.

I have nothing against symbolism, but we need ACTION. And to that end, a far more important plank to adopt at this point would be one that condemns judicial activism and promotes the restoration of proper Constitutional interpretation to the judiciary.


21 posted on 08/11/2004 3:44:50 PM PDT by mcg1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: mcg1969

Check out my second reason, above. If this happens, Bush's base will desert him in droves.


22 posted on 08/11/2004 3:46:57 PM PDT by firebrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Alcibiades
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.

I don't think it is because those who are more conservative are by nature very different than most liberals who are easily led and who will do what they're told. Conservatives like debate.

23 posted on 08/11/2004 3:47:47 PM PDT by FITZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: firebrand

Well, I have to say I believe you, but it would be utterly counterproductive of pro-lifers to allow Kerry in office.

You know, Jesus said that "the children of this world are more shrewd than the children of light." Sometimes I think that pro-lifers with truly the best and most honorable of intentions just blow it when it comes to strategic thinking.


24 posted on 08/11/2004 4:07:39 PM PDT by mcg1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: firebrand

I strongly suspect that the author is correct, this is a good description of what was done for the last two Nevada state conventions.

Our free wheeling and fiercely debated platform was ordered to be cut to no more than fifteen items, of no more than one line each.
Naturally this meant that many great planks had to be abandoned, and discouraged people who had fought for those planks from remaining involved with the party.

The most recent convention was the worst, the platform committee was closed, then it was open, but the planks were only referred to by number so that anyone who missed the closed portion had no idea what was being discussed!

The platform committee report was late.
Rules for amendments from the floor were poorly circulated or understood (having been abruptly changed at the previous convention), often ignored, and then the opportunity to present them was terminated suddenly, even while delegates who had carefully followed procedure were waiting their turn at the microphones.

This was my fifth state GOP convention, if the next one is as manipulated from the top as this one was it will be my last!

And yet the party hierarchy keeps asking why attendance is dropping, even in a presidential election year!


25 posted on 08/11/2004 4:17:09 PM PDT by Richard-SIA ("The natural progress of things is for government to gain ground and for liberty to yield" JEFFERSON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mcg1969

"Pro-Life" is not the only plank that will be made very bland or eliminated!

You can expect strong support for our RKBA to be watered down, efforts to reign in the U.N. and support American sovereignty will disappear too.

Statements in support of a self sufficient America, in any context, will be among the missing.

Both parties depend on the "grassroots" support to win the election.
The Libs have always managed their party from the top down, but it is painful and disheartening to see the same operating principle emerging in the Republican party.


26 posted on 08/11/2004 4:24:45 PM PDT by Richard-SIA ("The natural progress of things is for government to gain ground and for liberty to yield" JEFFERSON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: firebrand; rmlew; PARodrig
There is one thing that karl Rove has to have in the back of his mind. GOP insiders already know that Conservative Christians to the tune of three to four million stayed away from the polls and nearly cost Bush the election in 2000. The RNC has also been doing outreach to the churches and trying to register Christians in large numbers. Adopting a plank that does not mention abortion defeats the whole purpose. We shall have to wait and see. If the plank does not mention abortion then he is going to find like the last time that on issues that are of importance to people of faith they are likely to remain home.

You cannot have a party that has a large tent. You cannot be everything to all people. If that is what you want to be then you are nothing and people don't vote for nothing. It cannot be a choice between two grays, it has to be a choice between black and white. That's what will bring the base to the polls in November.



27 posted on 08/11/2004 4:25:45 PM PDT by Cacique (quos Deus vult perdere, prius dementat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Cacique

"GOP insiders already know that Conservative Christians to the tune of three to four million stayed away from the polls and nearly cost Bush the election in 2000."

For what reason?


28 posted on 08/11/2004 5:14:43 PM PDT by truth_seeker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: 2ndMostConservativeBrdMember; afraidfortherepublic; Alas; al_c; american colleen; annalex; ...

No platform for the unborn? Human Life Amendment? Nominating pro-life judges?


29 posted on 08/11/2004 7:02:17 PM PDT by Coleus (Roe v. Wade and Endangered Species Act both passed in 1973, Murder Babies/save trees, birds, algae)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: firebrand

Tanks for the heads up. Bump


30 posted on 08/11/2004 7:57:19 PM PDT by victim soul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 2nd amendment mama; A2J; Agitate; Alouette; Annie03; aposiopetic; attagirl; axel f; Balto_Boy; ...
I trust the President, but call these clowns anyway!

ProLife Ping!

If anyone wants on or off my ProLife Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.

31 posted on 08/11/2004 10:11:54 PM PDT by Mr. Silverback (Don't miss your chance to be a goon: Freepmail me to get on your state's KerryTrack Ping list!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: firebrand
I think trimming the pro-life plank is the right thing to do. If th politicians aren't going to actually honor the plank, they shouldn't sign on to it. If the Republican Party is not going to be 100% pro-life, it should cop to it.
32 posted on 08/11/2004 10:15:08 PM PDT by xm177e2 (Stalinists, Maoists, Ba'athists, Pacifists: Why are they always on the same side?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN; Coleus; nickcarraway; narses; Mr. Silverback; Canticle_of_Deborah; ...
If you go to http://www.gopconvention.com/contents/goplive/platform/

and scroll to "Which issue is most important to you?"
you will see "Culture of Life" as an option.

We should encourage everyone to take 60 seconds to fill out the form and select "Culture of Life" There is a section for "Your Thoughts:" A brief endorsement for the Pro-Life plank would be good.

I seriously doubt that the Pro-Life plank* is in jeopardy at this time but filling out this form won't hurt.

*Not that the "plank" has saved any lives.
33 posted on 08/12/2004 12:23:17 AM PDT by cpforlife.org (RE: Abortion, the question is not when Human Life begins, but how and when it will be ended.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: firebrand; Cacique
President Bush and Senator Frist have been pretty reliably on abortion, despite the stem-cell fiasco.
They have broken with their conservative base (and sanity) on immigration and border security. I believe that this is what they seek to downplay.
34 posted on 08/12/2004 12:43:11 AM PDT by rmlew (Peaceniks and isolationists are objectively pro-Terrorist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: firebrand

Thank you for posting this article. I left messages with most of them supporting the pro-life plank, but I suspect that they won't reach the intended recipients since their office phones and staffs can not be used for Republican Party business. I do know for a fact that the Wisconsin Republican Party's pro-life plank was stronger than ever. Do you happen to have a phone number for platform communications director Ginny Wolfe?


35 posted on 08/12/2004 6:11:25 AM PDT by Ronaldus Magnus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cpforlife.org

=== I seriously doubt that the Pro-Life plank* is in jeopardy at this time but filling out this form won't hurt.



I doubt very seriously Babs will be calling for its removal in order to help her son this time when Kerry's "Catholicism" has turned out to be such a nice way to cattle prod those Catholics who choose to vote in accordance with the Church's Non-Negotiable stand on abortion.


36 posted on 08/12/2004 7:44:52 AM PDT by Askel5 († Cooperatio voluntaria ad suicidium est legi morali contraria. †)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: CA Conservative
Bush may be commited to pro-life issues, but Karl Rove and company are not. They pulled this same crap at the state level in 2000. A new "inclusive" platform was produced without precinct or caucus input and it caused a huge row. If anyone in the Republican party thinks that this will fly, they are sadly mistaken.

If this happens, Bush will lose the election.

37 posted on 08/12/2004 8:12:18 AM PDT by antidisestablishment (Our people perish through lack of wisdom, but they are content in their ignorance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: antidisestablishment
If this happens, Bush will lose the election.

And if Bush loses the election, you can kiss the pro-life cause goodbye for the next 20-30 years. After Kerry gets his judges in place, it will become illegal to even question the right to abortion, cloning, infanticide, euthanasia, etc.

To vote third party, or refuse to vote, just because you don't like how a document that people see once every 4 years is worded, would be the epitome of "cutting of your nose to spite your face". In that case, you don't hurt Bush and the Republican party nearly as much as you hurt your own cause.

38 posted on 08/12/2004 8:19:14 AM PDT by CA Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: CA Conservative
Your insistence on equating every pro-life person with your stereotype is childish.

It is not a matter of personal voting; it is a matter of fact. If Republican Party tries to railroad through a watered-down platform, then they will lose. We are not Democratic apparatchik and we will not line up for the next five year plan.

You don't understand the importance of principle to the grass roots. They will not support a Party that operates in a manner that is antithetic to its core principles.

39 posted on 08/12/2004 8:39:25 AM PDT by antidisestablishment (Our people perish through lack of wisdom, but they are content in their ignorance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: antidisestablishment
Your insistence on equating every pro-life person with your stereotype is childish.

Always a way to win an argument - start out by calling names! BTW, I am not sterotyping, but issuing a warning based on what we already know about Kerry's positions.

You don't understand the importance of principle to the grass roots. They will not support a Party that operates in a manner that is antithetic to its core principles.

You make assumptions about me that you are in no position to make. I understand very well the importance of principle - I also understand how harmful a Kerry victory would be to the pro-life cause.

If Republican Party tries to railroad through a watered-down platform, then they will lose.

If Bush loses, the pro-life causes loses, period. Not just now, but for the foreseeable future - possibly forever. We might elect a pro-life president in 2008, but by then the damage will be done. The Supreme Court and the appeals courts will be lost for a generation at least.

Just FYI, I am ardently pro-life, and have been so for over 25 years. But I am not willing to risk having Kerry win and lose the war over in order to win a battle over some words in a document that 99% of Americans never read anyway.

In the first place, there is nothing in this article to even suggest that Bush is considering doing anything to the pro-life plank - that is just a hysterical assumption by some on this forum at this point.

Second, if by some circumstance the wording was tempered in order to gain more support, I would not be happy, but I would not sit at home or vote third-party, because I know from watching him actions that this is a resolutely pro-life president. That is one of his core principles, and I trust him to do everything he can to advance that cause, even if it is in small increments.

40 posted on 08/12/2004 9:18:20 AM PDT by CA Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 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