Dozens of GOP lawmakers would struggle with ‘purity test’: report

By Daniel Tencer
Wednesday, November 25th, 2009 -- 4:58 pm
Share on Facebook Stumble This!

republicanpartyelephantlogo Dozens of GOP lawmakers would struggle with purity test: report'Doubtful' purity test will be used in determining candidates: source

At least 40 current Republican members of Congress would find themselves at odds with some part of the proposed "purity test" for Republican candidates, says an analysis at the ThinkProgress blog.

Blogger Lee Fang indicates that at least 40 sitting Republican members of Congress would face challenges passing the purity test, based on their voting records. Fang notes that various Republican senators and representatives have supported measures such as the stimulus package, a public health care option, cap-and-trade climate legislation and amnesty for illegal immigrants -- all no-nos under the purity test.

Raw Story reported on Tuesday that Republican National Committee member Jim Bopp's proposed questionnaire designed to test a candidate's "conservative credentials" is meant to avoid situations like the one that arose during the special election in New York's 23rd congressional district this year, when Republican bigwigs abandoned the moderate GOP candidate, Dede Scozzafava, in favor of the more right-wing Conservative Party candidate, Doug Hoffman. Hoffman narrowly lost to Democrat Bill Owens.

While proponents of the "purity test" argue it would prevent the sort of situation seen this year in NY-23, critics of the GOP say it will result in the further marginalization of the Republican Party, as moderate candidates who can appeal to centrist voters will have a harder time winning nominations.

Story continues below...

But thus far, it appears the proposal for "Reagan's Unity Principle for Support of Candidates," as the purity test is officially called, has resulted only in rancor within GOP ranks. Politico reports that the debate over the test -- and its public airing -- is "frustrating committee members and reopening old wounds within a party still recuperating from a bitterly divisive recent special election."

The proposed test has "unsettled the committee, with some members expressing annoyance at the semblance of a litmus test and others at the public airing of a sensitive internal conversation," Politico adds.

Eric Kleefeld at TalkingPointsMemo cites an unnamed GOP operative as saying that local campaign committees will probably ignore the purity test if it's enacted.

"The litmus test puts too little emphasis on people's most pressing concerns of spending and taxes and therefore cannot be considered an effective tool to fully judge a candidate," the operative reportedly said. "Because of this, its doubtful this will be a major factor in candidate support."

And even some hard-core right-wing Republican supporters have come out against the measure. Writing at the RedState blog, Erick Erickson argues that the purity test may not result in more conservative GOP candidates, because it would allow moderate candidates to appear to be conservative while campaigning, before voting as moderates once elected.

The purity test will "give a lot of candidates cover to pretend to be conservative," Erickson stated.

Share this article:
  • Print
  • email
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • Facebook

Story comments are below...

  • andy
    How come they are not required to take a drug test?
  • Freedom's Toast
    "Uh, so let's get going, there's no other choice. God willing, we will prevail, in peace and freedom from fear, and in true health, through the purity and essence of our natural... fluids"

    "Now why don't you just take it easy, Group Captain, and please make me a drink of grain alcohol and rainwater, and help yourself to whatever you'd like."
  • michaelcrimmins
    This is my response to "G.O.P. Considers ‘Purity’ Resolution for Candidates".
    http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/23/g...

    I am a firm believer in the intent of our Founding Fathers as they originally wrote the Constitution. As a candidate for Congress, I am a pragmatist when it comes to policy making and the role of the federal government. When electing a representative, you should foremost be fully aware of their principles and values. Elected officials should be held to the same high standards of conduct and behavior we hold our military officers too.

    I have a long and proven history in public service. As a Major in the Marine Corps, I served over 20 years from Vietnam though Desert Storm. Later, I invested over a decade in the future of our children, as both a teacher and then a high school principal here in San Diego. In 2008, I was honored to be the Republican nominee for Congress against Susan Davis. With the developing momentum, she can be beat in 2010.

    I hold the following to be some of my core policy values:

    1. I support smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes. I do not believe stimulus bills fundamentally save or create jobs or boost the economy. I believe all cases of fraud, waste, and abuse should be severely dealt with.

    2. I support market-based health care reforms and oppose the option for a government run health care plan. Much of health care reform is non-partisan. These reforms include tort reform, lowering costs, increasing competition by permitting insurance policies to be sold across state lines and allowing groups to form coalitions to achieve lower prices. We should be drafting and voting on 3 to 5 specific bills to reform health care; not one massive overarching bill.

    3. I support market-based energy reforms by opposing cap and tax legislation. Consumers and businesses are taking tremendous strides to go green, whether by installing solar panels, recycling, building the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) qualified green infrastructures or by purchasing carbon credits to lower their impact. The market is setting the precedent for responsible business operations. We do not need to tax businesses out of business for the sake of lower carbon emissions, especially when India and China have no restrictions.

    4. I support the workers’ right to a secret ballot by opposing card check.

    5. I support legal immigration and welcoming legal immigrants as proud new citizens into American society. However, I oppose rewarding illegal entry with amnesty for those who broke our laws. Many of those who aspire to live and to work in the United States are great people with a rich heart, strong family values and an impenetrable work ethic. I welcome them to stand in line, share in the American Dream and pay taxes. We can do this by implementing an effective guest worker program and immigration reform package that includes due process, tamper-proof identification cards and a path to citizenship.

    6. I support victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges. Supporting our troops should never be about polls or public relations or the agenda at hand. It must always be what is best for the security interests of the United States and the safety and security of our troops, our true national treasure.

    7. I support containment of Iran and North Korea and particularly in effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat.

    8. I support the traditional family values. These were at the very core of our Founding Fathers, the Bill of Rights and the Constitution.

    9. I oppose health care rationing, the denial of health care and the government funding of abortion.

    10. I fully support the Second Amendment and oppose any further government restrictions upon it.


    Major Michael Crimmins, USMC (Ret)
    Candidate for United States Congress (CA-53)

    Website: http://www.crimmins4congress.com

    Facebook: http://facebook.com/michaelcrimmins

    “Some people wonder all their lives if they've made a difference.
    The Marines don't have that problem.” - Ronald Reagan
blog comments powered by Disqus