I recently came across a fascinating and prescient old Mother Jones article, published in January of 1998. Its full title:
“GOD'S VICE-REGENTS: the religious right has conquered the Republican Party in California--now they're bringing the same game plan to your state.”
What does this old article have to do with us? —Everything, I’m afraid.
In the article, Suzanne Herel wrote:
A faction of right-wing Republicans who believe in governing by the Bible has already taken control of the California Republican Party. Now they're poised to duplicate that feat in 35 other states—and counting—under the banner of the new National Federation of Republican Assemblies [NFRA]. Their immediate goal: to cultivate a Reaganesque candidate who can win the presidency in 2000. Their long-term goal: an America ruled by the word of God.
George W isn't Reaganesque, but he sure is rightwinged, and religiously so. Herel continued:
The story begins a decade ago. Frustrated by the failure of Pat Robertson's 1988 presidential bid, some of his followers in Sacramento hatched a plan to take over the California Republican Party. First they packed the then-moderate California Republican Assembly (CRA), a mainstream caucus with a heavy hand in the state party's nominating process, with their Bible-minded colleagues. By 1990 they controlled the CRA, and since then the CRA's clout has helped the religious conservatives nominate and elect local candidates and—crucially—catapult true believers into state party leadership slots.
Ten years of dedication and planning later, the operation is a stunning success. Members of the Bible-waving CRA—which now bills itself as the "conservative conscience" of the state GOP—hold the top 13 elected spots in the party leadership, from state chair on down to second assistant secretary. In addition to the top posts, CRA members now make up roughly two-thirds of the California Republican Party's 1,700 voting members. That means they decide whom to nominate in the primaries—and whom to smear using their considerable resources of influence and money.
…But California was just the beginning. Flush with their success, the leaders of the CRA have exported their model of state party infiltration nationwide…Already 36 states have Republican Assemblies modeled on the CRA, and organizers expect conservative groups in the remaining 14 to organize their own affiliates by Easter. NFRA membership now stands at about 15,000, says NFRA president Stephen Frank, a former president of the CRA who advocates legislating by biblical principles…Says Frank: "Our goal is to organize grassroots support to win primaries for Constitutional conservatives, and elections for principled Republicans."
…The NFRA game plan is grassroots politicking, CRA style: "We need to win council seats, school boards, statehouse races, assembly races, and Congress, and the cumulative will be winning the presidency," Frank says. "We're doing it the old-fashioned way: community by community."
…Dominating the GOP nomination process, CRA has racked up dozens of big primary victories….CRA also claims credit for the winning ballot initiatives Prop. 187, which denied benefits to illegal immigrants, and Prop. 209, which dismantled affirmative action; and CRA now champions the English for Children initiative, which would end bilingual education, and the Payroll Protection for Unionized Workers initiative, which would abolish the automatic payroll checkoff for union dues.
…The CRA's principles support the right to bear arms, strict interpretation of the Constitution, limited government, and "fair" trade and sovereignty. They condemn the separation of church and state, abortion, affirmative action, women in combat, and homosexuality.
And members…advocate legislating by the Bible."Legislation should be biblical principles put into action," Frank says.
…[Former CRA Veep John] Stoos, in an article for the Chalcedon Report, a journal of the radical Christian Reconstructionist movement, goes so far as to call Christian politicians God's "vice-regents...those who believe in the Lordship of Christ and the dominion mandate."
The "dominion mandate," Stoos told the MoJo Wire, "is that individuals are impacted by salvation. You will want to obey God's commandments, and to the extent you do that, you start being a better person. ...If there are enough of these groups in a community, the community is different. If government has a rule of law that is biblical justice, you will have freedom and liberty."
As proof of his theory, he points to the repeal in the 1970s of laws prohibiting homosexual sex acts—biblical offenses. "The proof is in the pudding," said Stoos. "Since we lifted those laws, we've had the biggest epidemic in history."
• The chief funder of the Christian Reconstructionist movement was then—and still is—fabulously wealthy Orange Countian Howard Ahmanson, a pal of Tom Fuentes’.
• Howard Ahmanson also funds the Claremont Institute, on whose Board of Directors sits Tom Fuentes. Ahmanson’s wife and Fuentes’ boss sit on CI’s Board of Advisors.
• Once, in a column that discussed the phenomenon of firms giving campaign contributions to both Democrats and Republicans, Fuentean crony Robert Novak quoted Fuentes as saying that, in Orange County, "we" call such contributors "whores." Mr. Fuentes is known also for his low esteem of so-called RINOs, Republican in Name Only, i.e., Republicans who are too willing to abandon core conservative principles. Fuentes sees himself as unyielding re core principles.
• Trustee Donald Wagner has been affiliated with Education Alliance, an organization funded (initially) by Howard Ahmanson and which originated 1998’s payroll protection initiative (an failed attempt to weaken the political clout of teachers unions). Wagner's 1998 trustee run was supported by EA.
• Wagner is founder of the local chapter of the Federalist Society, a far-right legal organization that is dedicated to a strict interpretation of the Constitution. The FS works closely with the Bush administration--e.g., in the selection of Supreme Court Justice nominees.
• When Tom Fuentes stepped down as Chair of the local GOP in 2004, during his "farewell remarks" (Fuentes' Farewell), he said:
Now, some have asked me what is it that gives me most joy in twenty years as Chairman of this County Party. It is a little thing. It is the fact that anywhere in this county, whenever Republicans gather, we begin our time together with prayer. You may pray in your way, and I may pray in mine, but, my friends, Republicans in this county always acknowledge a power higher than ourselves as did our Founding Fathers. And, the values, principles, and ideals that flow from the acknowledgement of the divinity, guides our conservative social agenda. It gives us pause to reflect on what is really important in life and society. It motivates us to defend causes that are so critical in the cultural war that today engulfs our nation and its society. Because you have allowed me to serve as your Chairman, I have been able to enjoy the opportunity to give encouragement to countless young activists to become involved in the leadership of our party. (My emphasis)
2. THE GREATEST BAD FOR THE GREATEST NUMBER
On Thursday, the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) meets in Washington.
According to the EAC website, “The U.S. Election Assistance Commission, an independent bipartisan agency, is charged with disbursing payments to states for replacement of voting systems and election administration improvements, adopting voluntary voting system guidelines, and serving as a national clearinghouse and resource of information regarding election administration. (My emphases.)
Elsewhere on the site, we are told that the EAC is a creature of 2002’s Help Americans Vote Act (HAVA), which seeks to, among other things, “establish a program to provide funds to States to replace punch card voting systems.”
It appears that HAVA came about as a result of the controversy surrounding the 2000 Presidential election. That makes sense.
As near as I can tell, however, lawmakers and those concerned with HAVA/EAC have proceeded on the assumption that improving the process of federal elections means moving toward electronic voting.
Yikes!
As you know, our own trustee Tom Fuentes is on the EAC’s Board of Advisors.
Uh-oh.
Last Thursday, the Commissioners testified before the U.S. House Committee on House Administration, saying:
Although EAC is amongst the smallest of independent Federal commissions, it may have the greatest impact on the largest number of persons. The changes that EAC has helped states and local governments make in Federal election administration will affect every voter in this country.
Maybe that's true.
At the risk of repeating myself, may I say “UH-freaking-OH!”