Steele draws opposition in RNC Chair race

Even after a reasonably successful midterm election cycle, current RNC Chair Michael Steele is drawing opposition for re-election from a former foe.

Saul Anuzis, who finished third in the balloting for the post in 2009, outlined a number of reasons he was taking on the incumbent, with the key being a “dramatic change in the way the RNC does business.” “I will be a tenacious fundraiser,” claimed Anuzis, who pointed out the RNC didn’t fund certain winnable races in several states.

But he also slammed Steele in a backhand way, saying:

My agenda is very straightforward. I have no interest in running for office. I won’t be writing a book.  It is not my goal to be famous.

In fact, most RNC chairs have been relatively anonymous except to political junkies and party leaders. Of course, in the era of a 24-hour news cycle the head of a political party can become part of the backstory and Steele’s ascension was seen by many as the GOP’s answer to the election of Barack Obama as our first black President.

Yet his tenure hasn’t been without controversy on overspending and, as Anuzis claimed, the lack of fundraising on the RNC’s part.

(I)n 2010 a group of alternative organizations emerged to help fill the void created by the RNC’s shortage of resources. They found support from many RNC major donors who had lost faith in the RNC. We need these groups and their support, but they can’t be expected to replace the RNC in a presidential year. We must rebuild the trust with our party’s major donors and bring them back to the table.

Obviously the drawback to having a national body such as the RNC is that they sometimes will be forced to support candidates who may not reflect the tastes of contributors; the RNC stepped in it on several occasions by backing moderate candidates like Dede Scozzafava in New York and Charlie Crist in Florida who alienated conservatives and eventually endorsed a Democrat (in Scozzafava’s case) or made an independent run for office as Crist did. It’s why a number of former contributors opted instead to donate to these other organizations or individual candidates, and this could be a problem Anuzis won’t be able to address.

One omission from the Anuzis announcement, though, is the 800-pound gorilla the GOP has to deal with – there was no nod to the TEA Party and its influence. That could be a drawback to some who are newly minted conservative activists and would like a signal that the Republican Party isn’t going to return to its former ways.

However, Saul comes from a state where success was such that the GOP won an open governor’s seat and regained total control of their state legislature, obviously with the help of activists inside and outside the TEA Party. As we all know from bitter experience, Maryland somehow avoided the Republican tide the rest of the nation reveled in, with only scant gains in the House of Delegates to call victories.

Anuzis just wishes to be a temporary Mr. Fix-It, since he states up front he wants to only serve until a Republican is elected President and installs his or her choice to run the Republican National Committee. While there was success in this election we can always strive for better and Anuzis is likely just the first to provide the members of the RNC an alternative to keeping Michael Steele on.

Speaking of the RNC, I got an interesting call this morning from a nice young lady who was trying to see what sort of interest there was in electing former gubernatorial candidate (as in keeping the seat warm until Bob Ehrlich decided what to do) Larry Hogan as state party chair. I’m all for him running if he wants, for the more choices we have the better winner we will likely have. So far I’m only aware of two other prospective candidates: Mike Esteve, who heads the Maryland College Republicans, and Sam Hale of the Maryland Society of Patriots.

We should be treated to an interesting race; may the best person win.

Author: Michael

It's me from my laptop computer. View all posts by Michael