Club for Growth Wears on Some Republicans
Tue, 05/19/2009 - 12:52pm | 
TheRLC
By Naftali Bendavid
Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter's switch to the Democratic Party underscores the clout of Club For Growth, a conservative group that targets Republicans it brands insufficiently committed to low taxes and small government.
The move also has inflamed a debate within the party: Are the group's tactics good or bad for Republicans?
Mr. Specter fingered Club For Growth as the key factor behind his decision, saying he would have lost the Republican primary to a Club-backed rival. His decision has prompted some Republicans to turn on the organization, saying it backs those who are so conservative that they then lose to Democrats.
"If their goal is to increase the Democrats' numbers in Congress, they're doing a very good job," said Rep. Steven LaTourette (R., Ohio), a moderate who won his seat in 1994. "Do they want a permanent minority of 140 people as pure as Caesar's wife, or a Republican majority that can get them 70% of the issues that are important to them?" (Republicans hold 178 of the 435 House seats and 40 of 100 Senate seats.)
The group's leaders insist its actions only help the party.
"The Club focuses on issues that are the Republican brand -- economic-freedom issues," said Chris Chocola, a former Republican congressman from Indiana who now heads the organization. "I don't think we lost the majority because we stuck to those issues. We lost the majority because we strayed from those issues."
Pat Toomey, the previous Club president, jumped into the Pennsylvania Senate race after Mr. Specter became one of only three Republicans in Congress to vote for President Barack Obama's $787 billion economic stimulus plan.
Republicans like Texas Rep. Jeb Hensarling praise the organization. "I'm not indifferent to who comes up here" to Washington, said Mr. Hensarling, who was elected with the Club's help in 2002. "I want people who live, breathe and vote what they espoused in the first place."
Other Republicans say the Democrats have the right idea with their approach toward the past two elections of fielding candidates even though they deviated from some elements of party orthodoxy such as abortion rights and gun control.
"I'm not looking to be a member of a club," Sen. Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.) told reporters the day of Mr. Specter's defection. "The difference between being a club and a national party is being able to play outside your traditional areas."
Critics of the group say there are several elections in which the Club defeated or weakened a Republican candidate. Republican Reps. Joe Schwarz of Michigan and Wayne Gilchrest of Maryland lost primary bids in 2006 and 2008, respectively. Both districts are now represented by Democrats.
"It brings a smile to our face when we see the Club For Growth going in, because in some instances it improves the prospects for our candidates," said Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D., Md.), who spearheads the Democrats' House campaigns.
A spokesman for Rep. Pete Sessions (R., Texas), Mr. Van Hollen's Republican counterpart, said Mr. Sessions "looks forward to working" with the Club "to the extent that federal campaign law permits him."
The Washington-based Club, established in 1999, mounts lobbying and public-education campaigns but is best known for its political-action committee, which directs money to Republican candidates. The Club's PAC spent $3.6 million in 2008 to promote or oppose candidates, and its members donated an additional $6.1 million to Club-endorsed candidates.
Club leaders insist that rarely has their involvement resulted in Democratic gains. Thirty-seven Republicans currently in Congress were elected with Club support, they add.
Mr. Chocola said Republicans are in trouble not because of the Club but because they have deviated from the fiscal responsibility that the group supports. "People who criticize the Club's efforts just want to stifle the competition," he said.
But Mr. LaTourette, the Ohio representative, said an overemphasis on ideological purity could make the GOP a permanent minority. "If the Democrats said everyone had to look like a Democrat from Massachusetts, they would not be the majority party," he said.
Tags:
Why I Am GOP Gov.
Why I Am GOP
Gov. Whitman's letter of 5-22 makes a statement that our central beliefs, as Republicans, can simply be stated as "less government interference in individuals' lives, lower taxes and fiscal responsibility." I would take issue, that her statement misses the point, which is that the Republican Party is the party of individual rights and individual dignity, individual responsiblility, and individual action, which joined together with the individual rights and responsiblities of 260 million other Americans, keep America the land of freedom and abundance that was first envisioned by the drafters of the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Lower taxes, smaller involvement of the central federal authorities, and greater concern for balance in spending and taxing (both being kept minimal) are derived from the one basic truth on which our Party was founded back in the 1850s, and which (I sincerely hope!) holds today.
The Republican Party was born to vindicate the equal right of all individuals to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. This dedication, from its earliest days, still animates this Party. So it is our object, as Republicans, to secure freedom, justice, and opportunity for all Americans. The Republican Party has always been the party of individual opportunity, and has also been the party of freedom and justice.
I am a Republican because I share a deep-seated trust in what free men and women, in a free country, can do, and a fundamental trust in the nature and capability of human beings.
All of us need to understand the principles of the Republican Party, and must work to ensure that the next generation of Americans knows clearly the principles of this Republican Party.
First and primarily, the individual is of supreme importance. Every American is entitled to the rights and privileges, and to the dignity and respect, of a free citizen in a free nation. Everything else depends from this main truth.
Keeping government in a position to help, not hinder, and encouraging free association and voluntarism as a means of satisfying our social obligation to help the weaker and needier, derive from this.
Putting church ahead of state, and dictating the terms of marriage are only footnotes, and aren't fundamental party policy.
The problem with the
The problem with the Republican party is that we lost and some are being sore losers. We LOST. I think Mitch Daniels said it best " stop whining". Let the Democrats give it a whirl. If they come up with healthcare, there are always flaws that we can run on to fix it. Democrats will screw up like some Republicans did and things will switch.
Remember, politics is funny. When you are in charge and popular everyone wants to be on your side. Make a mistake and you are thrown under the bus by your party and the public. The Democrats will make mistakes.
Isn't the focus of this club
Isn't the focus of this club slightly misrepresented here when the presidents notes "The Club focuses on issues that are the Republican brand -- economic-freedom issues" but doesn't mention their stand on the social issues that they have made required components of their supported candidates.
Maybe The Club itself is wondering if they've finally pushed their own agenda too far (answer is probably yes). Avoiding their strong links to the dividing social issues here isn't flattering, they should stand for what they are -completely. If you're acting as the morality police, shouldn't honesty be part of the creed?
Aren't Senator's Pelosi and Reid thankful to The Club for their seats? In fact, The Club most likely has put the PA GOP out of representation in the Senate with their project Spector.