Click here for all of Tim Mak’s reports from the RNC Summit in Hawaii.
UPDATE: RNC Chairman Michael Steele tells reporters that “after the expression of the chairmen’s meeting, where the chairmen unanimously rejected (the purity test),” it might be “problematic” for Bopp to bring the resolution to the floor.
Steele continued pounding away at the Bopp resolution, saying that, “the idea for creating a test to be a Republican, to me, feels counter to everything that Ronald Reagan stood for.”
Posted at 5:10pm
As the RNC’s winter meeting heads into several days of deliberation, Indiana National Committeeman Jim Bopp tells FrumForum that he feels confident that something resembling his ‘purity test’ resolution will be adopted.
Bopp is the RNC member who proposed the so-called ‘purity test’ resolution, which laid out a list of ten policy principles that Republican candidates should adhere to. As FrumForum reported later, Bopp also decided to introduce a second resolution, dubbed the ‘accountability resolution’. The newer resolution is, in essence, a watered-down proposal stripped of the litmus test for Republican Party candidates.
Today, about a dozen state chairmen agreed unanimously to oppose the purity test resolution in a non-binding vote. Despite this, Bopp remains hopeful that his ideas will be implemented in some form.
“I think that some form of an accountability resolution will be passed,” said Bopp. “I think we have gained momentum [over the last few months] because you see everyone here [at the RNC winter meeting] talking about it.”
Counter-intuitively, Bopp argued that his resolutions would actually help the party grow in size by attracting disillusioned conservatives. He argued that if the Republican Party didn’t return to its core principles, a third-party would be right around the corner.
“We’ve got to bring disaffected conservatives back to the Republican Party,” Bopp told FrumForum, explaining the reasoning behind his resolutions. “That’s what we have to be focused on.”
However, Jim Bopp did concede to some extent that the purity test resolution could bar qualified Republican candidates in certain areas:
The purity test “may, in certain areas, imperfectly take into account the circumstances of a particular race,” said Bopp. “That’s the down side.”
Mr. Bopp, who practices law in Indiana, admitted that while he’s confident the RNC membership will see it his way, he hasn’t actually talked to very many members of the committee to gauge their support. “I have not talked to most, all or even a substantial number of the committee,” he said.
That said, the need for clear, conservative action at the RNC is urgent, Bopp said. “We’ve got to stop Obama’s socialist agenda,” he added.
6 responses so far
1 GOProud // Jan 28, 2010 at 12:50 pm
Tim, I rest my case. Bopp’s not going to go forward with the GOP Candidate Purity Test resolution; I said so when you were first trying hard to make this into a mountain of an issue falsely pitting rogue conservative elements against the RNC leadership of Mike Steele.
Bopp’s resolution didn’t even make to the trash can of the hotel, as I thought it rightly deserved. I doubt it made it to the Winter Mtg floor for consideration… oh, that’s right, Bopp withdrew it and replaced it with a watered down version? Bopp needs a few lessons on intra-party politicking… sadly, you can’t provide them given your lack of insight into this issue.
But nice try at making a mole hill into a mountain.
2 Tim Mak // Jan 28, 2010 at 1:02 pm
GOProud – he introduced the second resolution in conjunction with the first. The purity test resolution may still make it to the floor. We’ll see.
3 TAZ // Jan 28, 2010 at 1:51 pm
The ten policy points outlined in the Bopp resolution (and my responses to them):
1. Smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes by opposing bills like Obama’s “stimulus” bill.
(All that really needs to be said here is the first part. There is no need in bringing Obama into the equation at all. I think doing so looks pety, personal, and in general is a disservice to the cause. I am all for a smaller government, smaller debt, smaller deficits, and lower taxes. And as a conservative, to prove my resolve and bipartisianship, the first department on the choping block I would volunteer is the Homeland Security Department.I am open to any intelectually honest discussion on any ideas that would further less government, taxes, spending and debt.)
2. Market-based health care reform and oppose Obamashrinkdismantlingbureaucracy-style government run healthcare.
(Once again, the first part is all that needs saying. But lets not pretend we have a semi-socialist system already. 40% of health care is provided in some way or the other under the umbrella of the government. I myself have no problems listening to any ideas that would lower costs and force actual competition. Competition promotes lower fees and better service, something most states and this country is drastically lacking.)
3. Market-based energy reforms by opposing cap and trade legislation
(McCain is for cap and trade, Palin is for cap and trade, Obamapettybipartisanshipchoppingintellectually is for cap nad trade…… maybehealth care there is something to be considered here. I dont know myself, but, once again, I would be willing to consider it if the facts were behind its adoption.)
4. Workers’ right to secret ballot by opposing card check.
(From what I have read this would keep the secret ballot but allow card check as well. I really dont care about the issue but would be willing to allow card check if it did indeed keep the secret ballot option open to the participants. Give the people more options and let them pick for themselves seems to be a pretty good way to go on things.)
5. Legal immigration and assimilation into American society by opposing amnesty for illegal immigrants.
(Along with the call for not allowing illegal alliens to become citizens, I would go for stiff punishments for American companies that hired illegals in the first place. You cant be against amnesty and support keeping the welcome mat at the door and the vacancy light on.)
6. Victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges.
(The Commander in Chief is the policy maker, not the Generals. We should never give the military the idea that we will rubber stamp anything they want. Our founding fathers put a civilian in charge for reasons that have worked for 200+ years, lets not tinker with it.)
7. Containment of Iran and North Korea, particularly effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat.
(I dont think we can “eliminate” their nukes. We can however try and keep them contained.)
8. Retention of the Defense of Marriage Act.
(Why? Who gives a crap if homosexuals want to be as misrable [divorce rate 50%] as the rest of heterosexual married America. Stop being homophobic would be one of my 10 things if I were making a “purity [sanity] test”.)
9. Protecting the lives of vulnerable persons by opposing health care rationing and denial of health care and government funding of abortion.
(When it comes to government dollars being spent on individuals for their health care we must ration care, we simply cannot afford not to. Not to mention rationing is alive and well today in the private health care market from our very own insurance companies. Why should my tax money go to a 80 year old life long smoker on medicade that needs a lung transplant? Being conservative is sometimes not pretty but lets not sell ourselves out just to look like the Bush era liberal compassionate conservatives.)
10. The right to keep and bear arms by opposing government restrictions on gun ownership.
( I love my guns. I am all for you having guns too. But, I dont like stupid people having guns. Any gun owner can tell horror stories of idiots they ran into at the range or out hunting that just should not have been carrying a weapon. Lets back up our love for guns by showing we respect the public too. Support background checks, waiting periods, manadatory saaliensfetymiserableMedicaid clamandatorysses and anything else the non-gun public reasonably asks. No reason we need to look like disrespectful backwoods Neanderthals on the subject.)
4 TAZ // Jan 28, 2010 at 2:05 pm
Sorry about the typos, not sure how they got in there……………….
5 Carney // Jan 28, 2010 at 3:57 pm
It’s constantly being called a “purity test” – but that’s inaccurate and (often probably intentionally) misleading.
In the first place, many of the requirements are themselves compromise positions. For example, rather than requiring Nellie Gray like purity on abortion, it merely calls for opposing government funding. Even pro-choice Scott Brown can back that (and it is a wildly popular stance).
In the second place, it allows people to squish on three of even these easy, popular, lay-up positions.
http://tinyurl.com/yc83dk8
http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZGZiMjBjY2QyZGQ1MzRjMmFkYzkyYTRiYzkxMWMxODg=
6 GOProud // Jan 29, 2010 at 11:27 am
Tim writes: “GOProud – he introduced the second resolution in conjunction with the first. The purity test resolution may still make it to the floor.”
I’m going to call that one: Bullsh*t, Tim.
No one was talking about a 2d resolution back in early Jan when people were dumping on the GOP and painting it as a Party pursuing Purity Tests resolutions in the name of Reagan. It wasn’t an accountability resolution… it was Bopp’s primary Purity Test resolution. It was infighting by hardcore conservatives intent on a RINO purge.
I said it wouldn’t even make it out of committee. You said then: we’ll see. Now, moving the goalpost a bit, you’re implying that a watered down version of an accountability resolution somehow meets the same test and was introduced the same time? Wrong-o, Tim.
And let’s remember that when the so-called “Reagan Resolution” was leaked to the MSM, the sponsor and others said they didn’t appreciate the leak, that this was inside the ballpark GOP politics for the GOP leadership’s and RNC membership’s consideration… but that caution didn’t stop pundits (like you) from playing fast and loose with the truth and portraying the GOP-RNC Winter meeting as a breeding ground for exclusionists, or the RNC in the midst of a RINO purge meltdown, or that Steele had lost his edge.
Bullsh*t on the moving of the goalposts, Tim. The Bopp resolution didn’t make it out of committee. It’s dead by the sponsor’s admission. Steele is still leader. Reason is still the coin of the realm in GOP politics. We’re still fixed and focused on electing the right GOP candidate for the proper constitutency.
Of course, that won’t sell controversy, will it? What is it with you? Are you trying for a Scott McClellan Award? I hope you have the Hawaiian nīʻau (nuts) to finish the story of the original Reagan Resolution and explain to FF’s readers why it was solidly, totally, unequivocally defeated.
You must log in to post a comment.