U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

Governor See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse

(D) Phil Weiser

(D) Jena Griswold

60%

60%

40%↓

Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) Alexis King

(D) Brian Mason

40%

40%

30%

Sec. of State See Full Big Line

(D) George Stern

(D) A. Gonzalez

(R) Sheri Davis

40%

40%

30%

State Treasurer See Full Big Line

(D) Brianna Titone

(R) Kevin Grantham

(D) Jerry DiTullio

60%

30%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd*

(D) Somebody

80%

40%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert*

(D) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank*

(D) Somebody

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(R) Gabe Evans*

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(D) Joe Salazar

50%

40%

40%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
September 03, 2015 10:27 AM UTC

Mike Coffman Sells His Soul To The NRCC

  • 19 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols
Republican uber-strategist Karl Rove, Rep. Mike Coffman.
Republican uber-strategist Karl Rove, Rep. Mike Coffman.

A fascinating report in this morning’s Washington Post about a “contract” that a number of vulnerable Republican members of Congress have agreed to sign in order to obtain assistance in the upcoming elections from the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC):

Two dozen House Republicans have agreed to privately detail their “legislative strategy” to party operatives, promising to offer “political justifications” for their goals in Congress.

The Daily 202 obtained a copy of the three-page contract that the National Republican Congressional Committee requires members to sign if they want to participate in its Patriot Program. The initiative, designed to protect potentially vulnerable incumbents, brings with it special attention and access to mounds of campaign cash. But strings are attached.

One of the 13 requirements is to submit an off-year “campaign plan” that includes: “Detailed, written legislative strategy that provides short-, intermediate-, and long-term legislative goals, including political justifications for those goals.”

“Be sure to include local issues unique to the district or region,” the contract says. “Complete a Patriot Policy Priorities worksheet to be used by NRCC staff to evaluate legislative priorities for the current Congress and to promote and advocate for those priorities where appropriate.”

Here’s a link to the contract obtained by the Washington Post. It should be noted that many of the provisions in this contract, like committing to fundraising targets and keeping off-year spending at a reasonable level, are common-sense campaign best practices that any smart political strategist would want candidates to abide by. Another provision requiring candidates to use vendors who meet the NRCC’s “standards,” meaning the NRCC’s handpicked vendors, is in fact quite dubious–but more to political insiders than the general public.

Where the NRCC’s contract gets truly dicey for its vulnerable incumbent signers, especially Colorado’s most vulnerable incumbent Congressman Mike Coffman, is the promise to detail “legislative goals” for NRCC staff to “evaluate.” Given that Rep. Coffman has tried as hard as he could to put daylight between himself and the Republican party line on issues like immigration reform, LGBT rights, and even abortion, having his legislative agenda pre-cleared by national Republicans makes Coffman’s “change of heart” since redistricting look as contrived as Democrats have always insisted it was from the beginning.

But at the end of the day, there’s got to be a return on, you know, “the investment.”

Tweet
Share

Comments

19 thoughts on “Mike Coffman Sells His Soul To The NRCC”

  1. This could be dangerous for Coffman, but if he manages to strike the right balance, it could also be a big boon. The NRCC is almost certainly asking for these surveys to figure out if endangered Republicans are worth spending money on – not to find out just how conservative they are, but to find out if they can win in their districts.

    The chair of the NRCC is Rep. Greg Walden, who is a relative moderate in the Republican caucus, especially compared to Coffman (113th House DW-NOMINATE rankings, numbered liberal to conservative: Walden #252, Coffman #350). I'm thinking that a measured response by Coffman could do him worlds of good.

  4. Campaigning wing of the party promises to support vulnerable candidate with politically motivated legislative strategy (i.e. getting a pass on supporting/proposing things that would be beneficial to winning the election, but that don’t necessarily line up with Party Doctrine) during election year, news at 11. 

    Sorry, this isn't some scandal. You can also guarantee the DSCC will be doing the same with Bennet. This is how politics works, folks. This shouldn't be a surprise to, well, anyone. 

      1. My point is, this isn't anything worth blogging about, or even caring about. This is just standard operating procedure. Only reason there's no DCCC/DSCC story as well is because the Dems are obviously more adept at controlling their paper trail. 

  7. Let's make a list of all the special interests Morgan Carroll has sold HER soul to, shall we? Trial lawyers, abortionists, and unions. I guarantee they have gotten their commitments from Carroll or she wouldn't be in the race. Didn't Morgan have a big meeting in Washington right before she got into the race?

    2. The trouble with the Johnny does it too argument? Whether true or false, two things: One, it takes as a given that whoever you are supposedly defending in this way is just as bad as Johnny, simply not worse.  Hardly an argument for against either party. Two, offering such a weak tea defense demonstrates that you've really got nothing better. Johnny does it too is always an argument for losers and whiners.

      Hope this cancels out our "agreement".

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

168 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!