Top of the News

Chosen and ranked by Crosscut editors. Click date for previous days.

Mouse over headline for description.

more top of the news

Advertisement

Advertisement


Most Commented

Crosscut articles of the past 10 days with the most reader comments.

The case for more rail transit
(123 comments)

Sound Transit showdown
(22 comments)

At the top floors, the high and mighty are in denial
(16 comments)

Little boxes, crammed together
(10 comments)

Our cultural amnesia
(9 comments)

More fun than Deliverance!
(7 comments)

Bus envy
(5 comments)

Helpful policy tips for Dino Rossi
(5 comments)

The geekiest arsonist
(4 comments)

Sausage Links, sex, satire, and rock 'n' roll edition
(3 comments)

Politics / Government »

Jul 26, 2007 5:00 AM | last updated Jul 25, 2007 1:30 PM
Washington GOP.
Advertisement
Advertisement

Dino Rossi + money + smart candidate recruiting + luck = a state GOP comeback

It's tough calculus, says the former state party chair, and the result isn't going to materialize overnight. But it's a way for Washington Republicans to rebuild the party from the bottom up. Second of two parts.

By Chris Vance

Editor's note: The author was chair of the Washington state Republican Party from 2001-06. This is the second of two parts. The first part was posted on Tuesday, July 24.


As I wrote in part 1, in 2006 the national GOP was in decline, and in the important suburban-Seattle battleground Democrats ousted many GOP legislative incumbents. It was a massacre. In 2004, Republicans had fared pretty well at the top of the ticket — except for the narrow and debatable loss of Dino Rossi to Christine Gregoire in the race for Washington governor. But in 2006, at the important entry level to partisan politics, the GOP was crushed.

So how do Washington state Republicans come back? There is a long road, and a shortcut, but either way they need some help at the national level.

My father owned and managed car dealerships. If the factory sent him cars that didn't sell, there was very little he could do at the local level. The same is true in politics. For the past eight years, the Republican Party has been defined by George W. Bush. Until the 2006 mid-term election, Team Bush had been a huge political success, but not in Washington state or the rest of the West Coast. Republican candidates here have had to convince tens of thousands of voters to vote for them, despite their opposition to the president. In 2004, gubernatorial candidate Rossi received 66,520 more votes than did the president. Having to run significantly ahead of the top of your ticket is a major burden for down-ballot candidates, such as those running for the Legislature.

In less than a year, the GOP will have a new leader. I was one of the first elected officials in our state to endorse then-Gov. Bush in 1999, and I worked hard for his re-election, so it pains me to say this, but it is critical that the Republicans nominate someone next year who represents new leadership, someone who can redefine and reposition the party. Rudy Guiliani would clearly be such a nominee. Until recently, the same was certainly true of John McCain. Can Mitt Romney or Fred Thompson appeal to secular west coast moderates? I think that is a major question mark.

Another big question is whether the Republican nominee will even try to win over such voters. The Republican electoral college map doesn't need to include the West Coast. Unlike previous Republican presidential campaigns, in 2000 and 2004 the Bush campaign did target Washington and Oregon and did spend money here, especially for get-out-the-vote programs. Those resources were tremendously helpful to the entire Republican ticket. If the Republican nominee writes off Washington early, an uphill climb for state GOP candidates gets even steeper.

Republicans need to cross their fingers and hope their new national leader will campaign on the West Coast and will be able to redefine the GOP. Assuming that the presidential race is at least competitive, there is a shortcut back to power: Elect Dino Rossi governor.

Is Dino going to run? I don't know. I do know that if he chooses to run, the race will be highly competitive. Polls taken since 2005 have consistently shown Gregoire and Rossi neck and neck. Predictions of how that race may play out might be a subject for another time. It suffices to say that if Rossi becomes Governor, if Republicans win that one election, the GOP is instantly back in the game.

A popular, suburban-friendly figure will lead and define the Party. Hundreds of Republicans will move into leadership positions within the administration. Republican legislators, whatever their numbers, will be relevant, backed by the power of the governor. The campaign funding disparity will improve as donors will have to recognize the changed political situation. Rarely has one race been so critical.

With or without a Rossi governorship, however, Republicans need to confront the changes that need to be made. First, they need stay the course established in 2004, and state party leadership needs to do everything possible to unite the party behind statewide candidates who can win in the suburbs. In 2008, that shouldn't be a problem. If Rossi runs, Chairman Luke Esser will have a ready-made, battle-tested, suburban-attractive statewide ticket. Going forward, the state party will need to continue to field statewide candidates who are conservative enough to unite and excite the base yet moderate enough to win.

The real problem in recent years, however, has been in legislative races, especially state House races. Until the national wave hit them in 2006, the Senate Republicans had been holding their own. They recruited good local candidates for key races, like Whatcom County Sheriff Dale Brandland. Their numbers hovered at or near a majority. Not so with the House.

Legislative races are largely controlled by the caucus political committees, not the state party. Caucus leadership and their political committee staff recruit the candidates, raise the money, hire consultants, and decide which races to target. Over the past several elections, Democratic Speaker Frank Chopp has built a formidable political operation while his opponents have been in a constant state of turmoil.

Clyde Ballard led the House Republicans from 1987 to 2002. I served on Clyde's leadership team in the early 1990s. He wasn't as political as Chopp has been, but Ballard always had his eye on raising money, recruiting candidates, and winning elections. Since Ballard retired, his successors have had to spend more time watching their backs than they have working to win races.

Since Ballard left, the House Republicans have gone from one leader to another. From Cathy McMorris to Richard DeBolt to Bruce Chandler and now back to DeBolt. One acrimonious leadership election after another. Constant turnover among top legislative and campaign committee staff. A caucus at war with itself is in no position to challenge the Chopp machine.

The House Republicans need to settle on a leadership team and give it time to turn things around. DeBolt was re-elected last November, along with a leadership team of those considered loyal to him, so it appears that has occurred. Now the House Rs need to dig into the hard work of politics.

They need to raise more money.

They can't out-raise the Ds at this point, but they can and must do better. They need to upgrade their political staff and improve their relationship with consultants. Given their financial disadvantage, they need to be patient and disciplined, and focus their money on five to eight races, maximum.

Most importantly, they need to get serious and systematic about recruiting high-quality candidates. Rather than simply allowing GOP activists to become candidates in winnable races, DeBolt and company need to identify and meet with Republican-leaning suburban city council members and mayors, school board members, PTA presidents, and other civic leaders. Those are the folks who need to be persuaded to run for the Legislature. This needs to be a full-time, year-round program that will aid the House and eventually provide candidates for the state Senate and other offices. Nothing could be more valuable in terms of rebuilding the party's long term viability.

Politics is a cyclical, unstable business. When I left the House for the King County Council in 1993, I was one of only 33 Republicans. A year later, there were 62 Rs in the House. Maybe the national mood will swing Republican as Bush leaves the stage. Maybe Dino Rossi will be elected governor. Much, much stranger things have happened.

In the meantime, Washington Republicans need to re-focus on the basics. Keep your message suburban-friendly. Talk about the things voters care about: traffic, taxes and spending, crime and public safety, schools. Raise money. And most importantly, start recruiting candidates who are part of the civic fabric of the communities they seek to represent. Doing so will not only be good for the GOP, it will be good for our state.

Our entire political system is based on competition and the accountability it brings. A one-party democracy isn't healthy. Politics is about struggle and choice. We need the Republicans to put up a fight.

  • Chris Vance is a political consultant who lives in Auburn, Wash. He was chair of the Republican Party in Washington from 2001-06, a King County Council member from 1994-2001, and a state representative from 1991-93. He can be reached at cvapv@comcast.net.
Comments
Bring on Rossi...
Report a violationPosted by: Timothy on Jul 26, 2007 10:08 AM
Mr. Vance...with all due respect, that's it? Your hope is pegged on "maybe Rossi can win?"

I say bring him on. I am hoping that the R's in this State put their eggs in that basket again. Rossi's only strength in 2004 was a fatigue with the Locke administration, and the sense that Chris Gregoire was going to follow suit. That's gone now, and Mrs. Gregoire has her own record to run on. All it will take is to compare the scare tactics of the Republicans to the actual record and state of the State since 2004, and Gregoire will walk this time.

But, what I really find interesting in this article, is the complete lack of care about any issues whatsoever. You didn't mention even a single policy issue. Why? Probably because the R's of Washington State have no relevant policy issues to run on. The "business will implode" message has been completely undercut by the latest Forbes magazine rankings.

Finally...the "it was the problem with the National ticket" argument is weak. Why? Because the R's of Washington State have shown no ability to stand against the failed policies of the Bush administration. If you supported those policies (and the R's of Washington have, consistently) then you can't point to "them" and say they were the problem.

In the end, you have nothing to offer us in this State. Your conservative ideology would have us build ourselves into the past. Here's a hint: you need to overhaul your ideology. Conservatism has failed.
RE: Bring on Rossi...
Report a violationPosted by: Chris Vance on Jul 26, 2007 10:46 AM
Well, if you want Republicans to stand against the Bush administration and renounce conservatism I guess you are recomending that Republicans become ...Democrats.

And I wouldn't root for Dino to run if I were you. Have you seen the recent polling? He is dead even with Gregoire now, even during this awful national environment for Republicans.

If I had written this piece a few years ago I would have focused on issues. I would have talked about how the Rs need to nominate statewide candidates who have a postive message on mainstream issues. Rob McKenna and Dino Rossi, however, did that in 2004 and I expect that they will do so again in 2008. (Assuming Dino runs) I think the problem is the message at the national level, and the campaign mechanics at the legislative level - which is what I wrote.
RE: Bring on Rossi...
Report a violationPosted by: Timothy on Jul 26, 2007 11:16 AM
No, I'm recommending that Republicans take a long, hard look at their core ideology. Small Government? How about the massive Govt. required to pursue the doctrine of pre-emption? How about the massive spending of Nation building? How about the intrusiveness into personal lives that are represented by the Schiavo case, the obsession with other's sexual preferences, the desire to have Government tell us who we can and cannot build our families with, the war on drugs?

Even you said that you needed someone, anyone, to rebrand the republican message; you just didn't offer anything, at all, by way of a reasonable suggestion? My suspicion is because you're still unable to break free from the Bush administration.

And yes, I've been watching the polling. Go right ahead. As I say, convince yourself that Dino's the great new hope for this State. The truth is, you have to prop up Dino because you've got nobody else. All of this talk of recruiting good candidates? Well, we're now watching the fruits of the Vance leadership; and there's nobody in the wings.

And, just to be clear, your only bright spot is McKenna, and he won on a strategic error by democrats. Deobrah Senn beat Mark Sidran by 1% in the first-ever primary that required specific party voting. Had Sidran overcome that 1% deficit, he'd have beaten McKenna in a walk.

So, if the problem is the message at the National level, I again invite you to outline some new messaging that will work here in Washington. The R's of Washington still think the war is a positive endeavor, think that the "surge" is close to succeeding, and have provided no leadership to move us away from that National message that you think is the doom of the party.

...and over at Sound Politics, their obsession with the 2004 election has them mired in the past, and itching for a Rossi rematch.

Perfect. The Dems will walk to easy victory, gaining even more momentum in 2008.
RE: Bring on Rossi...
Report a violationPosted by: Chris Vance on Jul 26, 2007 11:33 AM
It wasn't my task to write a piece about national issues. I will leave that to the national pundits. And the Governors race will not be about Iraq. But you are exactly right. National issues are dragging local Republicans down here. If Republicans nominate someone for President who can't change that they will be in big trouble in all races in 2008.

Republicans don't need to massively overhaul their message at the state level. The core Republican message of lower taxes and smaller government works in Washington when Republicans have strong candidates and aren't being outspent 5 to 1. Again, Rossi, McKenna, and Dave Reichert won districts that R legislative candidates lost.
RE: Bring on Rossi...
Report a violationPosted by: janellamarshall on Jul 27, 2007 2:34 PM
Timothy's on target with his comments.

If you think national issues are what's dragging the GOP down here, you're mistaken. Local issues are too.

Chris, it's YOUR party that refuses to do anything about priorities voters care about - education, transportation, healthcare, etc. The GOP isn't interested in real issues that affect real families. And when Democrats have taken the lead your party has turned around and given its support to right wing initiatives to undo those legislative achievements - i.e. Initiatives 912 and 920 - which failed. People are sick of your endless mantra about lower taxes and attacks on Democrats for understanding our revenue needs. Advocating for lower taxes constantly may sound like a winner to you, Chris, but it's cowardice, and Washingtonians want leadership.

As far smaller government - please, don't even get me started. Republicans are NOT for smaller government. It is the big government that you like. Anything that props up big business is good. What you really want to do away with is social programs, our safety net, because the conservative worldview is opposed to government assistance for those in need.
Local vs. National
Report a violationPosted by: dltooley on Jul 26, 2007 12:41 PM
A point or two for Mr. Vance -

Yea, the national stuff matters, but its the loss of principled connection to the individual where that plays out. All the State Republican's can do is to stay true to those principles, and not just for themselves, for everyone. You shouldn't have to be a card carrying R to be successful in business and we should always be able to rely on the party to keep a level playing field for everyone - not just 50 year old white males.

The typical independent voter is going to be sympathetic to a party that acts with integrity to anyone who believe in individual action and responsibility. One specific example of that is the requirement, in law, that independent votes NOT be tallied in primaries.

I'm a definite **I** - I don't have any problem with the parties excluding us from the selection process, but tally our votes, and if the independent vote leans toward your candidate, publicize it.

Such a publicized fact would likely have swayed more than 133 crossover voters in 2004...

-Douglas Tooley
Tacoma, WA
Why Be a Republican at All -- Let them die out like the Whigs...
Report a violationPosted by: Stuka on Jul 26, 2007 1:22 PM
Timothy, you make a good point. The lock-step salute-the-incompetent-leader Republicans have essentially squandered their opportunity to exhibit moral leadership about much of anything. Even the great Dino's legacy is essentially "I balanced the budget with the help of a Democrat Chopp during a fiscal crisis and by the way, I used to be a landlord." Pretty exciting stuff. He's electable because he's likeable.

The R's rabid response to losing to the governor's race makes them all look like little lap-dogs biting the legs of coffee tables because they have nothing better to attack. Too many in one room and there aren't enough legs for them all, so they turn on themselves. Witness the current gnawing on the carcass of the Bush presidency.

The standard Republican program of starving government rather than reforming government, fighting wars rather than solving problems, making the rich richer while ignoring everyone and anything else, sending blacks to prison and immigrants back to Mexico, plus the usual anti-gay, anti-abortion, anti-tax, anti-evolution, anti-discussion agenda led and leads reliably nowhere. When the D's are drunk with power and driving down steep mountain roads, then the R's tonic is a good one. But Gregiore is sober and driving on flat land.

My bone to pick with Democrats is on the fiscal side and how (Republican-like) they feed their winners and ignore the rest. Ultimately, D's have a bias towards action and do SOMETHING, even if ineffectively or inefficiently. Republicans on the other hand are often bipolar in behavior: there's either an astounding bullying that causes alienation and then paralysis, or a wearying incompetence undergirded by a lack of faith in the government that the Republican in question is leading. All this is nothing new, just another take on the Bush Administration and all the Koolaid drinkers locally who saluted their leaders. They watched as the Good Republican Frog was boiled, almost, into a Good Fascist Frog, not unlike the Good German Soldier of WWII.

Bush's approach to government was Mussolinian. Fascism is one of those viral phenomenons that rots at the head first, and then quickly down and worse, out. Thus the total train-wreck of the Bush Administration and the moral quagmire that the R's find themselves in. They find, not intentionally, that they've been aiding and abetting a morally bankrupt administration. They're no longer the party of Lincoln, but the Party of Torture and Katrina and Quagmire and Cronysim and Budget Deficit and Hypcorisy and Hubris and Blindered Thinking. The War on Terror reveals the Wart on Error growing on the nose of the Republican Crone. (Okay, I get carried away.)

The point is that Republicanism has fallen so far away from Lincoln and so deep down in one of the inner rings of Hell with Dick Cheney, Richard Perle, Karl Rove and Tom Delay that we should consider whether we ever want another Republican in office, and whether the Republican party is now COMPLETELY irrelevant, and whether another party should be substituted in its place, say a Progressive Party or a Green Party or a Christian Democrat Party (for the old evangelical R's) or a Libertarian Socialist Party (for wealthy entrepreneurs who give significant amounts to charity and non-profits) or a Global Do-Gooder Party for any former Communists still out there. Of if nothing else, maybe we bring back the reformed Republican Party and call them the New Whigs. Jeb Bush could be their leader.

More likely, we'll get one party rule for a few decades or so and will get some useful things done. Number one locally would be to get the D's to reign in the over-fed Sound Transit dog so that R-leaning voters perceive a sense of fiscal responsibility and thus allow a consensus to build behind the Dem's. If that happens, we may see real honest-to-God PROGRESS for many years to come.
Advice to Republican Strategist: Public Campaign Financing
Report a violationPosted by: Sarajane3h on Jul 30, 2007 12:48 PM
If I were a Republican strategist advising mainstream Rs on how to build back their bench, I would advise the Republic Caucus to wholeheartedly embrace public campaign financing at the municipal, county and state levels. Polls show the public is ready for this.

You decry the funding advantage of the Dems, yet all but one R in the Leg opposed public campaign financing, while most of the Ds supported it. (For a legislator to say, "I don't want my taxes going toward something or someone I don't believe in" is lame. We all get to pay for stuff that's not on our personal shopping list.) If you sincerely want to take Big Money out of the equation, this is a proven method.

In Maine, it's a completely bipartisan issue--83% of the state legislature chooses to run using taxpayer funding. Once out-of session legislators stop having to set aside large chunks of every week for "call time," and can use the time to communicate with voters instead, they love it.

Chris, what if you could have coffee with a promising activist or councilmember, ask them to consider running for office, and not have the discouraging cost of running for that office be the first and biggest hurdle? If I were the Republican strategist, I would advise the R caucus that public campaign financing is the fastest way to strengthen their bench.

Candidates would still have to collect dozens or hundreds of small (e.g., $5) contributions to qualify, an amount set to discourage those who just want their name on the ballot. Anyone with Mike McGavick's money or wealthy friends can still choose to self-fund, protecting their First Amendment rights to "free speech." For everyone else, taxpayer-funded elections will level the playing field and restore the public's faith in their elected officials. A few votes from the R side and we could be doing retail politics differently in 2009. For details, read how public campaign financing works.
Advertisement
Advertisement

Sign up for Crosscut's free weekday newsletter e-mail.
About Crosscut
Advertising Info
Crosscut's list of RSS feeds.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement


About Crosscut »
Crosscut Seattle is an online newspaper for the Pacific Northwest, including Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and British Columbia. It's a guide to local and regional news, a place to report and discuss news, and a platform for new tools to convey news.

• More about Crosscut

Contact Crosscut

Tools

Sign up for Crosscut's daily newsletter
About Crosscut
Advertising Info
Crosscut's list of RSS feeds.
Advertisement