KRyanJames's blog

Wednesday, 15 April 2009.

As Americans, it is our birthright to offer dissent. Our freedom to stand firm and question our government is what continues to make our nation exceptional. The fact I stand – without fear of reprisal - just outside the White House gates to participate in today’s protest is a testament to the power and blessings that we enjoy as Americans.

Our power is guaranteed in our Constitution, which announced to the world that this nation, and its people, which are exceptional – for it is “we the people” who possessed the power to form this “more perfect union.” It was our Founders who first brought about change. This change has been renewed by every American who exercises their power at the ballot box.

In November, our nation chose a new president from two major candidates who promised their own visions of change during these times of economic crisis. Like many Americans, and a majority of my home state, I made my choice for the Republican candidate. A majority of other Americans, including some people attending today’s tea parties, made a different choice.

I mention this because today’s action is not Republican or Democratic. It is not Red or Blue. It is not Conservative, Libertarian or Liberal. It is American. In fact, it is the most American thing any of us can do.

We must challenge our representatives to act on our behalf instead of acting on the behalf of special interests, lobbyists or labor bosses.

We must challenge them to articulate their ideas for fixing our economy and creating jobs.

We must challenge them by demanding details instead of rhetoric and rallies which belong on the campaign trail and not in the halls of government.

Regardless of your politics; regardless of whether you were opposed or supportive of the policies of the last administration; regardless of your opposition or support of the current administration, today is the day that we use our power, stand firm and say to this government: “Enough!”

We say “enough” to runaway spending, “enough” to increasing the deficit.

We say “enough” to increasing taxes, “enough” to policies which steal the future from our children and grandchildren in order to pay back your political allies.

We say “enough” to elected leaders from both parties who choose to be rubber stamps instead of advocates for their constituents.

We say “enough” to those who do not show leadership but instead blame their predecessors for their problems.

We say “enough” to shirking your duties as our elected representatives and ramming through legislation that no one has read.

In the media and on the Internet, there are many who have asked what the point of today’s action is; do we really think we can make a difference?

We can only look to the future for the answer to the latter question, for it is what we do in the days and months to follow – when we become active in our communities – which will determine the level of our success. To the former, we come together to in order engage our leaders and, with our combined power, enable them to once again claim, on our behalf, the mantle of leadership which they have vacated.

Today, we begin to hold this government accountable.

Today, we begin to cast off our common apathy and replace it with action.

Today, we begin to show our fellow Americans that it is acceptable to publicly voice their concerns and opposition to the policies of the current government without fear of the criticisms and accusations offered by the government and its supporters in the public and punditry.

In November, the nation chose “change.” Today, we say “enough.” And to those who choose not to listen to the words we speak today, I have this warning: when it comes time again to “change,” we will likely decide that we’ve had “enough” of you.

<strong>Crossposted at:</strong><strong><a href="http://ryanjames.us/?p=1198" target="_blank">K. Ryan James blog</a><a href="http://thenextright.com/kryanjames/on-tea-parties" target="_blank">The Next Right</a><a href="http://kryanjames.blogtownhall.com/2009/04/15/on_tea_parties.thtml" target="_blank">Townhall</a><a href="http://www.yrnetwork.com/blogs/1255/Kenneth-Ryan-James.aspx#article475" target="_blank">YR Network</a><a href="http://rebuildtheparty.ning.com/profiles/blogs/on-tea-parties" target="_blank">Rebuild the Party</a><a href="http://smartgirlpolitics.ning.com/profiles/blogs/on-tea-parties" target="_blank">Smart Girl Politics</a></strong>

Good morning, and welcome to the start of the 111th Congress. Your intrepid blogger remains on his voter-mandated vacation as he writes this, and it is not for a lack of trying.

As we move forward to the ceremonial opening of Congress, we must ask ourselves if Speaker Nancy Pelosi will beckon children to gather about her as she is anointed like she did at the start of the 110th Congress. Or, will she beckon the special-interest group which will be at the heart of every Democrat this session: the union bosses?

The news reports today detail how Madame Speaker has, with the likely tacit approval of the incoming president, decided to embrace her own versions of "Hope" and "Change": changing the rules of the House of Representatives back to the pre-Newt days in the hope of quashing all dissent and opposition in order to protect her caucus from politically tricky votes, and installing committee chairman for life - going back on the reforms Republicans brought forth in 1994.

House Democrats are poised to approve new rules that will significantly increase their authority while taking the bullets out of the few legislative weapons Republicans have in the lower chamber.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has approved the changes from the last Congress, when House GOP members frustrated their Democratic counterparts by winning over two dozen amendment battles on the floor.

Pelosi’s move has set up a divisive mood on the first day of the 111th Congress, which Republicans say runs counter to the tone set by President-elect Obama.

Republican leaders intend to fight the rules changes, which would curtail their ability to delay legislation by forcing Democrats to take politically difficult votes.

“This is not the kind of openness and transparency that President-elect Obama promised,” the GOP leaders wrote Monday in a letter to Pelosi.

Republican leadership aides say the changes will make it easier for the Speaker to run the House and protect vulnerable House Democrats.

As I write, Rep. John Larson (the new Rahm) is speaking on C-SPAN about working together with Republicans to improve the country (which is easy, I guess, when you write the rules in such a way that the only "working together" comes from voting with the Democrats). Per CQ:

Democratic leaders are taking a hard look at preventing the minority party from scoring easy political points with motions to recommit a bill to committee with instructions to make contentious language changes and then report it back to the House “promptly.” In the outgoing Congress, “promptly’’ has meant an indefinite hold, because committees were not willing to adopt poison-pill amendments sponsored by the minority.

Most motions to recommit require instead that an amended bill be returned to the floor “forthwith,” which means within minutes.

GOP aides complain that the possible limit motions to recommit would take away the minority’s ability to attack tax increases in must-pass bills. That’s because the pay-as-you-go budget rule, which is likely to be renewed, does not allow amendments or motions to recommit forthwith that would remove any of the offsets it requires in legislation.

The pay-as-you-go rule requires that all new entitlement spending or new tax cuts be offset with equivalent spending cuts or tax increases elsewhere.

So, to sum up. Speaker Pelosi will strip term-limits from committee chairman - giving them virtually unbridled power to dominate the minority party - while stripping the minority of the power to recommit a motion back to a committee. That sounds an awful lot like one-party consolidation to me.

This afternoon, I plan to attend the RNC Chairman debate hosted by the ATR (while I applaud the forum, I am still wondering why Grover Norquist has become the de facto arbiter of all things conservative).

The word from some in the press is that "everyone is pissed."

“Some people are p-ssed off at [Americans for Tax Reform President] Grover [Norquist]. Some people are p-ssed off at the Conservative Steering Committee. Some people are p-ssed off at [current RNC chair] Mike Duncan. Some people are p-ssed off at social conservatives. The social conservatives are p-ssed at leaders in Congress,” said a Republican consultant who has worked with the RNC. “Everyone is basically p-ssed.”

The busy upcoming week begins with a debate hosted by the conservative group Americans for Tax Reform on Monday, a set of meetings hosted Tuesday by a group of RNC members calling themselves the Conservative Steering Committee, and finally a special meeting of the full RNC on Wednesday.

Just three weeks later, the 168 RNC members will meet again in Washington to elect their next chairman — an officer tasked with enormous fundraising and managerial responsibilities, and with the potential to be an important carrier of the Republican message.

While those on the other side may have a hearty chuckle at our expense, I believe - in this instance - being pissed off is actually a good thing. I say this because when people are pissed, they tend to be more vocal and engaged in changing things - which is exactly what we need as a party.

The fundamental question facing the party is whether it wants to continue the top-down formula that progresses from the corner of 1st and D SE down to the regional political operation, then to the state party, to the counties and eventually (hopefully) to the partisan activists in our neighborhoods; or whether the party should embrace a true grassroots effort which builds the party into a national conservative movement from the ground up.

I am of the opinion that the latter position is the strategy in which we can overcome the obvious shortcomings we have encountered over the last two election cycles. I believe the men running for RNC Chairman have recognized (to varying degrees) the need to empower and engage activists. Which tactics they would employ, and at what levels, are what they need to explain and debate the merits of - and it is this type of debate I hope to see this afternoon. In fact, there are several points I hope to hear addressed. They are:

1. In a Democratic controlled Washington, how will the GOP provide opposition under your chairmanship?
2. How will you debate the issues facing Americans or will you defer to the Republican leadership in Congress?
3. How will you train activists at the local level?
4. How will you engage activists at the local level?
5. How will you recruit candidates for office at the local level?
6. How will you engage affiliated groups and coalitions in order to create and spread a conservative movement?
7. How will you reaffirm the conservative values of the GOP and make our candidates the true conservative alternatives to Democrats?
8. How will you embrace the Internet as a means of grassroots activism?
9. How will you guarantee the voice of younger Republicans (under 40) is heard at the full national committee level?
10. How will you use the talents of younger Republicans in ways more meaningful than phone banks and poster-making?

Thankfully, the debate will be webcast. It is very important that everyone who is not a member of the "Gang of 168" to watch this event. Everyone who cares about the future of our party should take notes today, then call your state's chairman, national committeeman and committeewoman in order to tell them who you think is the best choice to lead the Republican Party. This is imperative as our elected state chairmen and committee members are, in fact, our representatives to the GOP - not those whose political friendships supercede our wants - and they should be informed that they will be held accountable when it comes time to re-elect them.

By calling your chairman and national committee members and expressing your wants for the future of the party, you will begin the process by which the national party will become more engaged with its local supporters. By becoming an activist, you can help the Republican Party reclaim its mantle as the conservative party in the United States, and you can help craft a new conservative movement in this country that begins in our neighborhoods and could lead to a new, Republican, occupant at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.

My advice is to go on and be pissed. Be pissed at where we are at. Be pissed at how we have fallen. Be pissed if the powers-that-be dismiss the desires of local activists in favor of personal politics.

Be pissed, but be activist and be engaged.

UPDATE: Chairman Emineth responds in the comments, and Matt Dabrowski, who knows Emineth, posts a blog on the matter here.

The Chairman of the Republican National Committee represents the 59 million Americans who voted Republican on November 4th, not just 168 party officials. And through county committees and state committees, WE elect the 168. We may not have a vote, but we DO have a voice. Make sure that the choice for the next RNC Chair represents YOUR hopes for the future of the Republican Party by making your voice heard at RebuildTheParty.com or ChooseYourChairman.com. -Patrick

I wish to alert many of my fellow young conservative activists to the quote in this post’s title. It comes from North Dakota Republican Party Chairman Gary Emineth in a story posted today at TheHill.com.

The story details Mr. Emineth’s call for a special meeting of the full RNC in order to attend the ATR debate at the National Press Club on January 5.

While is it commendable that Mr. Emineth feels the need to gather as many voting members of the RNC to this important event, I feel it would be remiss not to challenge the North Dakota chairman for his comment. It is, on its face, an extremely arrogant one which lends credence to the belief that the Republican Party is elitist and it is, at the very least, a slap in the face of those young Republican and conservative activists who have joined together out of a common concern about the direction of the Republican Party.

Whether it occurs at Rebuild the Party, the YRNetwork, the Young Conservative Coalition or meetings like the forum we held in Washington, D.C., in early December, I would submit to Mr. Emineth that it very much matters what we (the public) thinks about the selection of our party’s next chairman. We, as young activists, have the opportunity to put pressure on our state party’s elected leadership - even going as far as to vote them out if they do not listen to a group which will represent their donor and volunteer lists for the next few decades.

I wonder what the then 28-year-old Mr. Emineth would think of the present-day version of himself when he was serving as the executive director of the North Dakota party back in 1986? Would the 1986 version agree that it did not matter what a young person like himself thought about the future of his party? I would think that Mr. Emineth, the 1986 version, would have an outlook similar to mine.

I do not know Mr. Emineth personally, so I cannot judge the chairman any further than his call for a special meeting (which I applaud) and the comment in the report (which I admonish). It is my hope that Mr. Emineth will disavow his comment which, in my opinion, is detrimental toward the movement that all of us are trying to build.

If you are so inclined, I encourage you to make contact with Chairman Emineth in order to let him know your reaction to his comments. All that I ask is that you are polite and offer the chairman a modicum of respect.

Moving forward, I believe it is in our best interests to get as many young people to contact your state’s chairman, national committeeman, national committeewoman and executive director in order to communicate your desires as to the future of the party in your state, the GOP as a whole and who will lead us in the future.