G.O.P. Debate: A Broader Party or a Purer One?

[florida mike532!]

G.O.P. Debate: A Broader Party or a Purer One?
WASHINGTON — A fundamental debate broke out among Republicans on
Wednesday over how to rebuild the party in the wake of Senator Arlen
Specter’s departure: Should it purge moderate voices like Mr. Specter
and embrace its conservative roots or seek to broaden its appeal to
regain a competitive position against Democrats?

With consensus growing among Republicans that the party is in its
worst political position in recent memory, some conservatives
applauded Mr. Specter’s departure. They said it cleared the way for
the party to distance itself from its record of expanding government
during the Bush years and to re-emphasize the calls for tax cuts and
reduced federal spending that have dominated Republican thought for
more than 30 years.


“We strayed from our principles of limited government, individual
responsibility and economic freedom,” said Chris Chocola, a former
Indiana congressman who is head of Club for Growth, a group that has
financed primary challenges against Republicans it considers
insufficiently conservative. “We have to adhere to those principles
to
rebuild the party. Those are the brand of the Republican Party, and
people feel that we betrayed the brand.”


But Republican leaders in Washington argued that Republicans would be
permanently marginalized unless they showed flexibility on social
issues as well as economic ones.


Senator John Cornyn of Texas, the head of the National Republican
Senatorial Committee, said he would seek to recruit candidates who he
thought could win in Democratic or swing states, even if it meant
supporting candidates who might disagree with his own conservative
views.


Mr. Cornyn said he was taking a page from Senator Charles E. Schumer
of New York, the last head of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign
Committee, who led his party to big gains by embracing candidates
who,
for example, opposed abortion rights or gun control.


“If you think about it, Schumer has been very good at this; I
complimented him this morning in the gym,” Mr. Cornyn said, adding,
“Some conservatives would rather lose than be seen as compromising on
what they regard as inviolable principles.”


Senator Lindsay Graham, Republican of South Carolina, said: “We are
not losing blue states and shrinking as a party because we are not
conservative enough. If we pursue a party that has no place for
someone who agrees with me 70 percent of the time, that is based on
an
ideological purity test rather than a coalition test, then we are
going to keep losing.”


The debate broke out as the party found itself in a particularly dire
state. Mr. Specter’s departure came a week after Republicans lost a
special Congressional election in an upstate New York district with a
significant Republican voter edge; as such, it underlined the extent
the party was contracting, not only ideologically but also
geographically.


In 2006, there were 55 Republicans in the Senate, compared with 45
Democrats. With Mr. Specter’s departure, there will be 40
Republicans.
Depending on the outcome of the election between Norm Coleman and Al
Franken in Minnesota, Democrats could end up with 60 votes, enough,
assuming they hold the party together, to take away the minority
party’s most powerful weapon, the filibuster.


The wide margin puts Democrats in a strong position as they prepare
to
deal with President Obama’s agenda on issues like health care and
global warming.


Politics are cyclical; not long ago Karl Rove, at the time the chief
political adviser to President George W. Bush, was boasting about the
Republican Party enjoying a permanent majority.


The dominance now enjoyed by Democrats could prove equally
transitory.
Several Republicans said Democrats could suffer a backlash if
economic
policies pushed by Mr. Obama failed to lift the country out of a
recession.


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/30/us/politics/30repubs.html?_r=1&nl=p...