On the NRCC’s Responsiveness to Its Donors

Two weeks ago, I sent the following letter to Congressman Greg Walden (R, OR), Chairman of the National Republican Congressional Campaign.

16 November 2013

8432 Mesa Verde
Plano, TX 75025

Re: NRCC Contribution Request, 5 Nov 2013

The Honorable Greg Walden
National Republican Congressional Committee
320 First St, SE
Washington, DC 20003

Dear Congressman Walden,

I’ve received your letter requesting contributions to the NRCC, but I have concerns.

I had, also, received your earlier survey, identifiable to me by the document control number and my name and address on it.  In filling out this survey and sending in a $500 check, I added some comments to various of the questions.  Even though the NRCC cashed that check on 31 October—more than two weeks ago—I’ve yet to receive any response to those comments.

Given the NRCC’s apparent reluctance to respond to concerns raised by your correspondents, why is it useful for me to send any more money to your organization?

I look forward to your early response, and thank you for your time.


Eric Hines

Walden has chosen not to respond.  Since the NRCC does not listen to its donors, but expects us, instead, simply to pony up like any Democrat ATM, I have to question to wisdom of sending our scarce and hard-earned dollars to this crowd.

What’s our alternative?  Look hard at the Tea Party candidates in your area.  If that one fits, send your scarce and hard-earned dollars directly to that person’s campaign organization.

Remember the Buckley Rule, though, and take it to heart: support the most conservative candidate available who’s actually electable.  It does us no good to vote for someone who cannot win, even if he fits our criteria to a T.  If that one isn’t electable, we just give the seat to a Democrat.  The establishment Republican candidate might have been a better choice than Todd Akin in Missouri, for instance, or than Christine O’Donnell in Delaware, or than Sharon Angle in Nevada.  Of course that’s harder to assess in real time than in hind sight: vet carefully.

One thought on “On the NRCC’s Responsiveness to Its Donors

  1. Pingback: On the NRSC’s Responsiveness to Its Donors | A Plebe's Site

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *