The story has an update – see below.
Obviously Jim Pelura either reads my site or does a daily Google search for his name. (I think it’s the former.) Regardless, he was kind enough to send along some of his correspondence telling his intention for the Contract With Maryland, portions of which I’ll excerpt today.
From Pelura’s original e-mail to Senator Allan Kittleman and Delegate Tony O’Donnell, dated July 30th:
Outlined in my 2007 Strategic Plan for the MDGOP, among other things, is the creation of a “Contract for Maryland”. This concept was introduced by my Ad Hoc committee to form a strategy for the MDGOP.
As we come into the election season, Maryland Republicans are not, and should not be content with the same old Republican byline of lower taxes, smaller government, etc., etc. We must present a new, unified and relevant Maryland Republican Party and alternative to the Democrats and Martin O’Malley.
(snip)
I have asked Mr. Mykel Harris, Chairman of the Prince Georges Republican Central Committee to head this commission. This commission will be made up of members drawn from Central Committees, MDGOP Executive Board, Republican Clubs and activists.
Of course, to fully round out this commission, and to present to all Marylanders that we (Republicans) mean business, we must have the cooperation and input from the Republicans in the Maryland General Assembly.
I ask both of you to give this serious thought and forward me the names of a Republican Senator and Delegate that you would prefer be a part of this group. You both are more than welcome to be part of this or appoint someone. Your choice.
So we learn that the idea has been around since 2007 and that astute Republican leaders should have known this was coming! Truthfully, there was no need to work on this before now since our cycle is only once every four years.
But instead of being cooperative and perhaps working to add to their numbers, Senators Kittleman and Nancy Jacobs wrote this on August 7th – not directly to Pelura, but to state Executive Committee members:
As you may know, the House and Senate Republican caucus leadership received an email dated July 30, 2009 from Chairman Jim Pelura requesting legislative participation with the group he had formed to review the Contract with Maryland. The Chairman requested that we respond prior to August 9, 2009. Since this is an extremely important issue, we felt it was best to send our response to the entire Executive Committee.
The Chairman’s proposal runs contrary to our previous recommendations to him that the Maryland Republican Party focus its time and resources on the fundamental campaign mechanics of registering voters, recruiting and training candidates, organizing grassroots coalitions and implementing a GOTV program to support Republican candidates statewide.
Moreover, it is critical that the Maryland Republican Party secure sufficient funding to address the changing dynamics in Maryland elections due to the Democrat’s (sic) implementation of early voting. To counter the Democrat’s (sic) strategy, we cannot repeat the failures of 2008. For example, it is essential that the Party fund a statewide absentee ballot mailing prior to the opening of the early voting polling places.
As we have said before, we believe the party’s continued focus on policy issues has been detrimental to fulfilling the Party’s core mission of preparing and funding a statewide campaign plan for November 2010 – an election that is just a short 15 months away.
For these reasons, we will not be participating in Chairman Pelura’s misguided effort to develop policy positions.
I understand the points that Kittleman and Jacobs are making and they correctly point out what can be considered flaws in our 2008 strategy. (We had little to do with the weak top of the ticket though.)
But I think in being so dismissive the Senators simply created another rift in the Maryland GOP that was completely unnecessary. Certainly part of Pelura’s job lies in those fundamentals Kittleman and Jacobs outline but in truth that’s really the job of all of us in the trenches as well. Moreover, it’s obvious that their position in the General Assembly gives Kittleman and Jacobs a little more insight on what policies may be a little more palatable to the more moderate Democrats on the other side – unless we somehow saw off the Prince Baltigomery area of the state we’re not going to be in the majority come 2010. (I don’t think taking the Democrats down under 85 seats in the House and 30 in the Senate is undoable, though.) Given the disaffection with Governor O’Malley in some quarters of the Democratic Party in Maryland there’s a pretty good chance some on the other side may tacitly back provisions Republicans come up with.
I think that Republicans can do it all; in fact the absentee ballot mailing could prominently feature the Contract with Maryland and news can be made with individual GOP candidates throughout Maryland publicly affixing their signatures. It sure beats the constant news about having an “embattled” party chair.
Anyhow, Pelura fired back August 8th:
Dear Senators Kittleman and Jacobs,
I respect your decision not to assist the MDGOP in this Commission, however, please allow me to clarify some of the remarks in your letter:
1) As you can see from my original request, I asked you to assist in the creation of this “Contract with Maryland’ and not “review” an existing document. Your use of the word “review” infers that the document has already been written and in reality, it has not.
2) In your email, you list several other items that the Party should be concerned with, such as fund-raising, candidate recruitment and other crucial elements of the 2010 elections. You infer that the formation of this “Contract with Maryland” commission will interfere or supersede those other Party duties. This inference is simply wrong and without justification as those other duties are continually on-going.
3) Your claim, that the attempt to draft a “Contract with Maryland” is misguided, is misguided in itself. The idea of a contract is a result of an ad hoc committee that was made up of Maryland Republican Central Committee members from around the state formed by the MDGOP several months ago to lay out a strategic plan for the Maryland Republican Party. I do not consider the hard work of those dedicated Central Committee members to be misguided.
Here’s the story, then. Two Senators (and presumably one Delegate) don’t want to play ball and lend their expertise on something which may be able to help their party and perhaps assist in their re-election. I think the Contract is a good idea myself and certainly Dr. Pelura (and anyone else on the CwM committee) is free to peruse my site and scout for any points they’d like to add – with almost 4 years at this I’d like to think I’ve come up with some useful stuff.
However, I have another name that Dr. Pelura could reach out to. He is a man with legislative experience but one who’s free from the shackles of seeking re-election by his own choice. So why not ask Sen. Lowell Stoltzfus for input?
Again, I have to remind my cohorts in the Maryland GOP that the constant infighting simply creates headlines in the Sun and the perception that we don’t have our act together. With Democrats and the allies in the media always looking for openings they can exploit to further consolidate their power, our fire should be concentrated on them.
Update: I received communication today (Friday, 9/4) that Delegate Nic Kipke has stepped up and offered the services of those interested among the House Republican Caucus. Kudos to Delegate Kipke for placing principle above personality and power.