November 24th, 2009
06:16 PM ET
4 years ago

RNC resolution won't 'handcuff' Steele, co-sponsor says

 RNC members have drafted what's being described as a 'purity' resolution.
RNC members have drafted what's being described as a 'purity' resolution.

WASHINGTON (CNN) - One of Republican National Committee members who helped draft resolution that would prevent moderate candidates from receiving party money said Tuesday that the measure is not intended to challenge to the leadership of Michael Steele, the RNC chairman.

"I think it's sufficiently broad so as not to handcuff him," Nebraska committeeman Pete Ricketts said of the so-called "purity" resolution, which first leaked to reporters Monday.

The resolution, sponsored by Indiana committee member Jim Bopp Jr., proposes a ten-point ideological platform for the Republican party and would require GOP candidates to adhere to at least eight of those points. If not, a candidate be prohibited from receiving financial assistance from the RNC.

Bopp told CNN Monday that the resolution will help Steele avoid criticism from the right-wing of the party. "This resolution will establish standards so that he won't feel obligated to support every Republican and not feel criticized," he said.

Ricketts said the resolution was sparked in large part by the contentious special election in New York's 23rd congressional district, in which a third party candidate, Doug Hoffman, entered the race as an conservative alternative to the moderate Republican candidate, Dede Scozzafava. Conservative activists nationwide rallied to Hoffman's side, eventually driving Scozzafava from the race, which was ultimately won by Democrat Bill Owens.

"NY-23 crystallized for us some of the issues the Tea Party people had with Republican party," said Ricketts, one of the resolution's ten co-sponsors. "We felt like we needed to send a message that we are the party of conservative values. This resolution is one way to demonstrate that we mean what we say."

Ricketts disagreed with the suggestion that the measure is an attempt to purge moderate voices from the GOP.

"It's just the opposite," he told CNN. "What it says is that we are a broad party, that we understand people are not going to agree with us on every issue."

He said the resolution, which could be introduced at the RNC Winter Meeting in Hawaii come January, is still "a work in progress."


Filed under: Michael Steele • Popular Posts • RNC
soundoff (296 Responses)
  1. please please

    please split,

    Moderate Republicans can save the day here.

    Let the Brown Shirts Conservatives devour each other.

    Good luck Mr. Steele, time of your life eh?

    November 24, 2009 05:54 pm at 5:54 pm |
  2. Glenn from Miami

    So much for the "big tent" philosophy....scary mentality but not surprising. Alot of Republicans are a fearful, intolerant bunch of ideologs...so out of touch yet claim to "real" America. Not sure their idol Ronald Reagan would be proud.

    November 24, 2009 05:54 pm at 5:54 pm |
  3. coach

    The scary thing is to realize we have elected congressmen who think this makes sense.

    November 24, 2009 05:55 pm at 5:55 pm |
  4. Mike in MN

    Probably not a good idea to have a purity resolutiion within the party. It would be best to just let state and local primaries determine the Republican candidates based on the wishes of the local registerd Republicans. But I don't really care much either way.
    As an independent conservative, I will vote only for a conservative candidate. Don't care what party they belong to, Republican, Independent, third party or even Democrat. I believe my position is the same as a majority of conseratives. We don't care what the Republicans do. We do care about voting for conservative canditates. Our loyality is to conservativsim, not the Republican party. If the Republicans on the ballot on election day are true conservatives, I will vote for them. If not I will choose an alternative.

    November 24, 2009 05:55 pm at 5:55 pm |
  5. Four and The Door

    The Democrats were going to counter with their own 10 points but they could only think of 9:
    1. Spend spend spend.
    2. Spend spend tax.
    3. Spend tax tax.
    4. Tax tax tax.
    5 Tax spend spend.
    6. Tax spend tax.
    7. tax tax spend.
    8. Spend tax spend, and
    9. tax spend spend.

    November 24, 2009 05:57 pm at 5:57 pm |
  6. Shimanilami

    Frankly, I respect a man who will write down his positions and stick by them. I thought it was bold when Newt Gingrich created the Contract with America. Even though I did not agree with all of his positions, I knew where he stood.

    I wish this was a requirement for political candidates and parties. Alas, politicians are far too slippery.

    November 24, 2009 05:58 pm at 5:58 pm |
  7. markiejoe

    I'm very happy about this resolution. It will ensure that the Republican Party remains a shrinking minority party for at least another generation, never wins another national election, never wins another state election outside the Deep South, and hopefully will shrink the GOP into permanent irrelevancy.

    So you go, Mr. Bopp.

    November 24, 2009 05:58 pm at 5:58 pm |
  8. TM

    Does the RNC realize that Reagan would only have scored 4/10 on that test? Does this mean that the Republican Party doesn't support Reagan?! What's next? Loyalty Oaths to Palin?

    November 24, 2009 05:58 pm at 5:58 pm |
  9. Joe Terrogano

    Keep leaning far right and make our day!

    November 24, 2009 05:59 pm at 5:59 pm |
  10. Rick

    So the Republicans are being asked to follow 70% of the Commandments. Isn't that special!

    November 24, 2009 05:59 pm at 5:59 pm |
  11. Liz in Seattle

    Call me crazy, but even I, a die-hard liberal, miss the days when the Republicans made sense. Even if I didn't agree with them, I could at least respect them. And at times they were good for keeping my Democrats honest. With them in freefall the democrats have no counterbalance and everyone is just starting to sound crazier.

    November 24, 2009 05:59 pm at 5:59 pm |
  12. Minnesotan

    First, the Republicans didn't want to even allow debate on Health Care Reform, which is censorship and fascism. Now, they have a 'Purity Test?' This sounds more like a cult. How delusional ARE these people? Either way, they scare me and make me afraid of an America under such a distorted view.

    November 24, 2009 05:59 pm at 5:59 pm |
  13. Chris

    The party of hate continues to push anyone and everyone away that isn't a FULL BLOOD NeoCon. They should start calling each other commrade.

    November 24, 2009 06:00 pm at 6:00 pm |
  14. Norman Solow

    Wow! History does repeat itself. A purity decree.

    Sounds like the rantings of Germany 1939.

    This really is the party of extremism and extremists.

    Norman

    November 24, 2009 06:00 pm at 6:00 pm |
  15. Joanna

    Ricketts disagreed with the suggestion that the measure is an attempt to purge moderate voices from the GOP. "It's just the opposite," he told CNN. "What it says is that we are a broad party, that we understand people are not going to agree with us on every issue."

    "The Republican Purity Resolution"
    (howling, holding my sides, tears streaming down my face)

    OH, OH!!! Are they going to have a purity ball too? And take the "pledge"? They'll all get little heart pendants and Rushbo the key!

    November 24, 2009 06:00 pm at 6:00 pm |
  16. Proud American

    What are they trying to say? If you haven't cheated on your wife, gone after little boys, drove drunk and go to church every Sunday your not entitled to RNC funds?

    November 24, 2009 06:00 pm at 6:00 pm |
  17. Marie Laveaux

    What a bunch of clowns. If I didn't have such utter disdain for them I would feel sorry for them.

    November 24, 2009 06:01 pm at 6:01 pm |
  18. Paul

    Yes indeed, Purity is important in the Republical Partyl Joesph Goebels, Von Ribenstoff, Reinhard Heidrich must be looking up from hell and feeling proud of the Republican Party.

    November 24, 2009 06:02 pm at 6:02 pm |
  19. Mike in WI

    It's not often in anyone's lifetime that history records the spectacle of a historic political party committing suicide. But now, the attempt is clearly being made. Let us hope and pray that the attempt will not be successful. If the perpetrators of this outrage should attempt suicide, political or otherwise, that's different. Let none hinder.

    November 24, 2009 06:02 pm at 6:02 pm |
  20. mjm

    Can we be honest here for a second, I mean brutally honest and forthright......

    Would Micheal Steele be in his current role within the Republican Party if Barrack Obama lost the election......?

    _________________

    Can I be Honest? Steel became RNC chairman after the election....not before.

    November 24, 2009 06:02 pm at 6:02 pm |
  21. Kristina, Seattle

    No? Well then maybe they could just muzzle him.

    November 24, 2009 06:03 pm at 6:03 pm |
  22. Throw out all incumbents

    The sad part is a bunch of people actually thought this was a good idea.

    November 24, 2009 06:04 pm at 6:04 pm |
  23. craig

    Lets make the GOP a little more close minded and full of hate. WHats happening to the Republicans.

    What a disgrace

    November 24, 2009 06:05 pm at 6:05 pm |
  24. mtnthc

    I wonder if Reagan, a moderate CALIFORNIA Republican, would pass,...guess not since he raised taxes,...

    November 24, 2009 06:05 pm at 6:05 pm |
  25. PacificView

    (1) We really wanted another great depression
    (2) No plan for health reform
    (3) No plan to curb global warming
    (4) Low wages and low benefits for all workers. More money for the CEOs!
    (5) Ilegals bad.
    (6) More troops regardless of the mission.
    (7) Duh.
    (8) Gays bad.
    (9) More money for health insurance companies, with less coverage for all.
    (10) Arm the crims.

    November 24, 2009 06:06 pm at 6:06 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12