Released yesterday to RNC members. Thought that I’d post it here despite its length:

An Open Letter to the Next RNC Chairman

As Republicans gather this week to choose their new National Committee Chairman, much of the debate has centered on the philosophical reasons for the GOP’s losses in 2006 and 2008. The same discussion that reared its head in ’64, ’74, and ’92 has made it to the front pages of publications and to the roundtable programming on all of the network and cable news shows. Ultimately, the answer will be what it has been before: that the Republican Party must be the Republican Party and stay true to its conservative ideals yet be aware that Reagan’s coalition was built upon the principle that “my 80% friend is not my 20% enemy”..

As a two time candidate for US Congress, a soldier on the front lines of the political battle, I need to concern myself with more clinical matters, however. We can do all of the philosophical maneuvering in the world and come up with all of the answers but the endpoint will do us no good if we do not revamp the actual execution. In short, even if the Republican Party “finds itself” in the next couple of weeks, we have a long way to go before we have a mechanism that works.

On a less philosophical level I can tell you that we didn’t loose because we stood for the wrong things. We lost because our system is broken. We put all of our eggs in a “fifty percent plus one” strategy at a time when the indicators told us that the other side was competing in all 50 states.  I coached for many years and liken 2006 to a terrible first half. The problem was that our coaches took us into the locker room and told us to keep doing exactly what we were doing. The signs were there. We could have watched the film and realized that the other guys had a better strategy and we could have come up with a better game plan for 2008 but we stuck with what got us crushed.  Now we’re crushed and demoralized and arguing amongst ourselves about how to rebuild the program.

Surely we need to take back our brand and stop allowing our opponents to decide who we are  but individual campaigns have a certain formulamatic piece and we are currently lacking in that realm. We rely on a bad overall game plan and have some outdated plays. Our Voter Vault system, once the jewel in our crown as a method of voter ID and GOTV planning has become outmoded and we have been bested in the tech realm. We have the wrong players in the wrong positions and we are not able to anticipate the future because we are dwelling on our past. There are seven things that we can do right now to get back on offense and focus on the end zone again.

1) Recognize regional differences within our Party.  What works in the Bible belt may not work in New England. Republicans are not “one size fits all” and the success of the Reagan coalition was that “my eighty percent friend is not my twenty percent enemy”. I’m not saying that we should abandon our conservative principles and become “Democrat Lite” but I do believe that the current national brand has expedited the decay of the Party in once solid New England. Yankee Republicans were fiscally conservative and believed that folks should be left alone to run their businesses, farm their lands and worship in their churches. They were rooted in their communities from Camden, Maine to Danbury, Connecticut and now they are gone. Different areas require different focal points in order for the Party to thrive as a whole.

2) Standardize, integrate and professionalize the RNC Regional Political Directors and NRCC/NRSC field operations. We have a tendency to write off certain states. We have a tendency to think of the RNC, NRCC, and NRSC as having separate goals. We have an understandable tendency to fill crucial positions with “rookie prospects”; promising young up-and-comers who have the energy to sustain a two hundred and fifty day travel schedule each year. The problem with that strategy is that, as talented as they may be, they have no gravitas. It is tough for a federal candidate or State Chairman to take advice and criticism from someone who has not walked in the shoes of the experienced. In order for the RNC to bring influence at the campaign level, we must populate these positions with experienced and older folks who can relate on parity with those they advise. It will cost more to get them but they are out there.

3) Create a network of regional PACs. It is hard to raise money for some races. The emotion is not there. In my own home state, the second district is represented by Jim Langevin who everyone seems to like despite his big government ideas. We fielded no candidate against him in 2006 and a likable, intelligent businessman who was grossly under funded in 2008. There was no spark to fuel the money train in that race alone but if one were raising money regionally and distributing support back through that PAC there would be more hope. Add in the names John Kerry, Patrick Kennedy and Ted Kennedy and there is potential for a stronger effort.

4) Identify and recruit candidates for 535 federal races. I’m a believer that everyone deserves an opponent. It keeps the incumbents from spending their money in support of our targeted races. Lets keep them busy and spending their money in their home districts. It is a travesty that no one was motivated to go after Henry Waxman in California. Somewhere in his district is a young energetic committed and outstanding Republican who will ascend to that seat. An organizational framework that operates at one hundred percent will find that person in their business or in their non-profit or in the hospital or on the street where they work and will develop their interest.

5) Train Candidates. It’s not enough to fill the ballots with capable folks. We need to teach them how to get the job done. A history of winning in State Assembly races does not guarantee the knowledge of how to win federal office. There is a whole new level of PACs, grassroots organizations and policy networks to access. It is not enough to rely on outside organizations to train our candidates. The RNC network should be accessed to support regional training programs which would also strengthen the possibility that we have avowed and committed small government Republicans and escape the “rat heads in the Coke bottle” who Grover Norquist is famously right in criticizing for ruining the brand. This training support process will also open up regional networking opportunities so that candidates may feed off of each others successes and learn from their failures.

6) Fund the start-up process for each and every candidate and support weaker state Party offices. It is wrong to rely on self funding millionaires to populate our candidate ranks. There are good people out there who have strong abilities and small bank accounts. Diversity can be a strength for our Party once again but it takes money to raise money and, whether I like it or not, credibility is directly proportional to the size of a candidate’s bank account. Through the regional PAC system, each and every candidate should be given a small seed donation to grease their fundraising apparatus and assess their chances.

In addition, the weakest ten or fifteen State GOP offices should be supported with enough funding to ensure that their operational expenses are covered. Simply knowing that the Executive Director and Office Manager salaries don’t have to come out of a candidate funding effort will create a better Party culture and a loyalty down the line. It’s what the opposition has done and it seems to be working for them.

7) Provide candidates with a quality supporting cast. While the restrictions on direct cash to a candidate have been curtailed by McCain-Feingold, there is opportunity to provide services. Many candidates are not grounded in a network that includes national level experts in fundraising, direct mail, polling, or media strategy even if they have been successful as state level politicians. We have the opportunity to grow those networks for the candidates by providing polling results through the regional PACs and then allowing the candidate and consultant to grow their partnership outside of the Party support system. Likewise other consulting disciplines can be introduced and even the simple act of hiring a strong campaign manager who knows how to win can be simplified. In this way, the Party structure can act as a networking organization and bring value to every candidate’s campaign.

This will be an interesting week. Some will say that the first order of business should be to chase off the RINOs. Others will say that, if we keep them around and nurture them, RINOs can grow trunks. In the end, though, no matter who our new Chairman is, and no matter what philosophy he brings to the position, in order for any candidate to enter the arena wearing a Party badge, the Party must bring the promise of “value added” to the table. That promise has always been a strong network support system but, as we have lost our principles, so too have we lost our structure. Restore that structure and restore that interwoven strength and we return the Party to its rightful place because, again, we are at heart a center right Party and this is a center right nation.

The word just was put forth: Stewart Smalley is now the Junior Senator from Minnesota. It took a system that allowed for the discovery of ballots in cars, stuck in machines, and quite possibly down in the basement behind the furnace. Never can tell where a ballot is going to show up but, at least if you know what you want the eventual outcome of the race to be, you have a number to shoot for and a goal. Makes me wonder whether we had teams from Venezuela, Cuba, and Somalia observing.

Then there’s New York. That one kinda hits home for me. Hmmm… Kennedy…. America’s Royal Family… Yup -been there, done that. I’m amazed. It is enough to have made me almost comfortable with the possibility of Senator Caretaker Sick Willie. If I needed someone to take care of something for me – don’t think he’d be my first choice but the idea of appointing a Kennedy to a seat simply because of popularity based on a last name really sickens me.

Our founding fathers created this wonderful document called the US Constitution. At the time this forgotten document was drafted, I am quite certain that there was institutional awareness of a body dubbed the “House of Lords”. In that body, the British folks are represented by people who live in manses and ride to the hunt and drive sweet cars like the Bentley Continental GT. Our guys sidestepped that process and specifically created a system rooted in things other than last names.

I was once approached by a friend in DC about championing a Constitutional Amendment to prevent relatives from succeeding their kin in our Legislative Branch. Its not a bad idea. Don’t get me wrong – I’m sure that Duncan Hunter Jr. is going to do a great job but we have to be fair. There are a lot more Kennedys than Hunters across the nation and Duncan Sr is probably through raising kids.

This all came up during speculation that my former opponent was going north to take his father’s Senate seat in Massachusetts. Speculation died down though when the Liberal Lyin’ announced that he wanted his wife to ascend to the family seat. The Heir Transparent will have to wait until his step mom is finished. The other name that came up was former Congressman Joe Kennedy. Seems that the seat has belonged to a Kennedy for over 50 years with a two year exception. Jack had become President and Ted wasn’t yet old enough to sit at the big kids’ table. Simple fix – JFK had his roomie from Harvard keep the seat warm for two years.

The idea of familial ownership has come up in NY too. “The open seat is Bobby Kennedy’s old seat”, say Caroline’s advocates. Excuse me, but wasn’t Bobby a carpetbagger? Didn’t he move to NY to run for the seat just as his nephew came to the Ocean State with the intent of running for Congress? There was rumour that Teddy Jr was going to move within Connecticut and challenge Chris Shays. Shays is gone now, of course. One Republican, it seems is too many but Kennedys political lives must be allowed to multiply like bunnies.

Maybe its time for that amendment. Maybe its scope should be expanded in order to limit parents and children from serving at the same time. Maybe the amendment should stop siblings and cousins from serving together. Maybe it should say in big bold letters: POLITICS WAS NOT INTENDED TO BE A FAMILY BUSINESS OR A LIFETIME CAREER CHOICE!!!! GET A REAL JOB AND LET THE PEOPLE GOVERN THEMSELVES. NOW GO AWAY.

I wonder if Stewart Smalley has a sister.

JPS

Former Rhode Island Senator Claiborne Pell passed away in the opening hours of 2009. As a Republican and conservative, there was a policy divide between he and I that stretched the length of Rhode Island but, oddly – and much to the amazement of political allies who visit my office - I proudly display a picture taken of me with the Senator circa 1988.

I was a lobbyist for increased student aid then and he was my greatest friend. The man for whom Pell Grants were named opened the halls of power to a neophyte who was still awed by a city where bumping into the powerful was as common as sneezing. His legacy may very well be in that he opened access to the educational system and afforded opportunity to those who would not have otherwise had it. That was where we met in the middle. I believed – and still do – that the greatest ideals of this nation lie in opportunity to achieve being made available to anyone who would take advantage of it.

The Senator was also a foreign policy expert and, in his later years in the exclusive club, Chaired the Senate’s Committee on Foreign Affairs. It was a disappointing culmination of a life dream for him. He was criticized for spreading the committee’s power out among sub-committees and for not using the pulpit and the gavel to challenge Republican Presidents Reagan and Bush 41.

Therein lies the point of my thoughts: Claiborne Pell was, perhaps, the last of a dying breed – the brontosaurus in the tar pit or the buffalo on the plains. He was a Democrat to be sure but he was an American first and tried to follow his conscience and to do what he thought right. He was a diplomat and a statesman and always brought class to the fight, whether we agreed with him or not.

The other day, on twitter, I was referred to a post about “sock puppet” attacks on Sarah Palin attempting to paint her supporters as racist and ignorant. I read another piece that spoke to the left’s mission to make the word “conservative” equal the worst four letter word that has every crossed the lips of “Joe the Carpenter” as he smashed his thumb with the hammer. These are not people who respect their opponents nor are the combatants who bring class to the debate. They do not believe, as Pell did, that the best interests of the nation dwell at the center of the discussion.

Today’s Democrats believe that they must win at all costs, defeat the Republicans once and for all, and create a one Party state that feeds at the tax trough. Not all of today’s Democrats subscribe to the mantra, I know, but the modus operandi has become about negativity and about hate and about Bush derangement syndrome. The message is not one of pride in America but rooted in hatred of America – Not a celebration of success but a condemnation of success. They have lost all sense that where bipartisan ideas come from is in a shared belief in opportunity for everyone and have, instead,  focused on their own opportunity to solidify power while creating a culture of dependence for America.

Claiborne Pell was an amazingly wealthy son of privilege who believed that others should have the opportunity to rise above. If, on the way up, he believed, they could have the benefit of a helping hand, they could then add to, and further, the greatness of our nation. Once upon a time, his Democrat ideals and my own, born of the “Reagan Revolution” found common ground. That’s why I display his picture in my office. May we all endeavour to champion opportunity for everyone. Rest in Peace.

JPS

As I put the memories of two failed bids to unseat Patrick Kennedy from his Congressional seat in Rhode Island’s first and stare down the road at a new born 2009, I’m faced with decisions and a set of possible resolutions. The Kennedy races actually came about in the millennium as a New Year’s resolution spoken at the dinner table of a friend in Wellesley MA. That it didn’t come to fruition until 2006 is neither here-nor-there. It is a resolution kept.

This year, I have resolved to become a literary giant… well not a giant per se – but at least literary. My intention is to write an essay each of the first 100 days of the year. There are no mandates – no parameters – just a desire to get the thoughts of a four year political endeavour down onto paper. I want to catalog my positions on issues in more than a sound bite manner. I want to tell stories from the campaign trail (because everyone loves a good yarn about Patrick Kennedy) and I want to explain why I ran.

There are a lot of ”Monday Morning Quarterbacks” who have never had their name on a ballot who believe that they have the answers. They fault candidates and are the din of foolish voices that we hear over our shoulders if we listen really carefully. I’m no longer a politician in the strict sense of the word. I’ve crossed over firmly to the activist side of the equation and I have the opportunity to call some of these folks out. I’ll never say never, but I don’t foresee myself running again anytime soon. That attitude brings tremendous freedom.

To be sure, I’ll praise those who need praise, as well, and there are a number of great folks toiling in the fallow fields of New England Republican politics. I’ll start my essays here, because it seems that RI needs a voice on RedState (contradiction in terms…?). I’ll expand my thoughts in each piece and hope to publish them towards the end of the year in a collection which I have always intended to call “Conscience of a Candidate”.

If I have to self publish – so be it. I have to keep my resolution, after all. If, however, your resolution this year was to become a literary agent, give me a call. Maybe we can start a resolution support group.