Welcome, if you're new here, you may want to subscribe to our RSS feed or subscribe to our email newsletter. Thanks for visiting!

This is a post of explanation. It is not meant to advance or defend any candidate for state or chapter College Republican leadership. I hope to set the record straight to the extent any untrue statements have been made. I speak only for myself.

The situation is both simple and complicated. We are in the midst of a engaging race for chair of the Wisconsin Federation of College Republicans. In this race, many statements have been made by may different folks involved. Some have attacked decisions made by the current state CR executive board. As an appointed member of that body, let me explain my thinking on several of the issues raised: Fundraising, the Endowment, and “Uselessness.”

1. FUNDRAISING
A. I believe it is not a good idea for the state College Republicans to fundraise with direct mail (our primary tool) in the fall. First of all, fall is a time when mailboxes are already bursting with mail from candidates; our’s could very easily get lost in the deluge and people’s willingness to give is already often stretched thin. Moreover, people tend to be more motivated at that point to support candidates than organizations. Second, our volunteers have limited time to offer the organization, and we wanted everyone in the leadership and in the chapters concentrated on campaigning. Third, our donors are generally consistent Republican donors willing to give year round.

B. As a general matter, I do not like the idea of fundraising for fundraising’s sake. We shouldn’t go out there and get money simply to have lots of cash and appear rich and powerful. We’ve seen where such thinking has landed the CRNC in the past.

We are asking supporters to part with their hard-earned dollars to support a cause and an organization. Our primary goal in fundraising is to keep our state convention and state leadership conferences affordable for students to attend. This year our CR Convention is just $27 for a full weekend of food and fun. That’s a pretty reasonable rate I think. Our state summer leadership conference was free. Beyond those two events, why raise money? We’re not going to be running TV ads or developing a chapter box (every school already gets the CRNC box). I fear sometimes we talk about raising more money just for the sake of raising more money, and that’s not the way we should go about it.

I have heard it suggested that the state CRs should raise money and then give it to campus chapters. I think this is a bad idea. First, as a practical matter, it is much easier for local chapters to raise money than for the state federation to do so. The chapters have many more connections to tap - alumni will give to their alma mater. Local county parties or the campaign committees of elected officials may give to chapters within their district. Area Republican activists see the work of their local CRs every day. And the local CRs know who these people are - know who they can turn to for support. The State Federation has none of these institutional advantages. Which is not to say that the state cannot raise money, but rather that the idea of revenue sharing from State to Chapter is a bad one. I’d much rather see the State Federation concentrate on training chapters on how to fundraise, providing sample direct mail copy, for instance.

Moreover, as a philosophical matter, as Republicans we believe in local control and individual responsibility. We don’t want to create a “culture of dependency” where chapters get lazy, abandon their own fundraising, become dependent on the state federation for support. Again slipping back to practical, while it is good for chapters to have a stake in the state federation, I don’t want races for CR state chair becoming contesting promises of who will ship a greater percentage of dollars raised back to the chapters, and which formulas for distribution pit big vs. small, state vs. private, urban vs. rural.

The caveat I would enter here is that while I do not support a standardized, formulized revenue sharing plan, I do think we should at least talk about start-up grants of several hundred dollars for new chapters to get on their feet and get going (similar to the seed money Leadership Institute provides to start conservative student newspapers).

2. ENDOWMENT
A. I think we should start by remembering that the delegates to last year’s state convention elected Stacy as 1st Vice Chair on a very specific platform of creating an endowment. I did not hear any of the hue and cry against the plan at that point; moreover it was endorsed by the delegates implicitly by their election of Stacy.

B. We met on the endowment, we talked about it a lot, we sought counsel outside CRs, and we drafted some initial plans for it. We do, for the record, know what an endowment is and what it does. After talking it around, we came to the same conclusions about the need for a large initial pot to make it worthwhile.

C. Ryan Wrasse was not a participant in these discussions of the Executive Board because he was not a member of the Board this year. You can read Ryan’s thoughts on a “long-term savings plan” on his blog. To characterize what Ryan called for on his blog as the same as the endowment plan that Stacy proposed is a mischaracterization I think.

D. All of that said, and here I reiterate that I speak only for myself, I think there is value in setting aside some percentage of the money we raise aside. Call it an endowment, call it a strategic reserve, call it a rainy day fund, call it an ING Direct account, whatever - I think it’s a good idea to have an intentional plan to set some small percentage of revenue raised aside. In addition to the opportunities such a reserve might create, I think it is just good financial practice for any individual or organization.

3. “USELESS”
I’ve heard the word “Useless” batted about (and I should specify here not by either candidate for chair) to describe the State College Republicans this past year. I think that’s a mistaken characterization of the situation.

A. Our summer leadership conference in Madison was a worthwhile event. We had leaders from chapters across the state drive to Madison; we met in the State Capitol building in a hearing room. We talked about a number of ways for chapters to get involved in campaigns, grow their membership, fundraise, etc. And we built a good camaraderie among the state E-board and the chapter chairs who attended.

B. We had a good fall campaign season. Admittedly, things did not go well for Republicans nationwide or here in Wisconsin. But College Republicans were actively working for Mark Green, John Gard, and Republican candidates down the ticket. Our CRNC field representative, working hand in hand with the state leadership, did a great job of starting new chapters and encouraging current ones. Our Operation STOMP was a fun day, and we did a lot of good work statewide lit dropping and phone calling.

C. The State leadership was instrumental in encouraging chapters to put together large delegations to attend the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in January and Young America’s Foundation Midwest Conference in February. Wisconsin sent awesome representation to both events, and we’re very proud of that. Looking forward, I confident we will have a great state convention next weekend.

D. I think it is important here to offer two additional thoughts. First, if chapters chose not to participate in the events the State Federation took the lead on, to miss conferences and conference calls, then I think their right to complain is limited. Second, it is worth bearing in mind that the State Federation exists primarily to offer support to its chapters. Often it is smaller and newer chapters that need more of that support, and thus get more attention from the state leadership. Well established, large chapters have much of the training and infrastructure and stability that they can do their thing, the state can cheer them on, but it’s not an active hand-holding and support as it is with new chapters or chapters in transition.

Okay, that’s it. Those are my thoughts. I have disabled the comments function on this post because it is meant to be about facts and my personal rationales. I very much desire that it not be about candidates or individuals. I’ve disabled the comments to prevent any of the nasty back-biting that sometimes bubbles beneath the surface. If you do want to send me a comment or thought, or feel I’ve been unfair or inaccurate in some way, you are welcome to send those to info@gop3.com. Thanks for reading, thanks for caring, thanks for what you do for our common cause. Remember, in the end, everything we do ought to be about families, here and in Iraq, freedom, here and in Afghanistan, opportunity, here and in Columbia, or China, or anywhere else. We are doing good, we are spreading worthy ideas, and just that we are engaged is in itself a noble endeavor. Let’s not let this petty stuff get in the way of accomplishing great things.

• Why Van's the Man - January 5th, 2009
• 9th Cir. Screws up Scouts' Case - January 5th, 2009
• Favorite Moment in the Final Days - December 29th, 2008
• Over on MULS Faculty Blog - December 29th, 2008
• The Race for DPI Superintendent - December 29th, 2008