I wrote two weeks ago that fears of a conservative schism in 2011 were overblown. One of the key points was that a letter from the gay Republican group GOProud and several Tea Party activists, which asked Republicans to focus on economic issues and not social issues, did not presage a big fight on something that Republican voters basically agree about.
Well, one caveat: GOProud is, as it was in 2010, at the center of a distraction for the Conservative Political Action Conference. Not something that will capsize the conference, just as their 2010 involvement didn’t capsize the conference.
So, the backstory. On November 14, GOProud published its letter . This irritated some of the already-frustrated social conservative groups that were looking at participating in CPAC. On November 15 , the American Principles Project announced that it would not participate in CPAC. That group gathered more critics of GOProud for a November 23 statement promising to boycott CPAC: Gary Bauer’s American Values, the anti-Don’t Ask Don’t Tell group the Center for Military Readiness, Liberty Counsel, and the National Organization for Marriage. That letter also claimed the support of the Capital Research Center, a libertarian think tank, but that was a mistake.
“It was just a mix-up,” says CRC’s Terry Scanlon. “They called us when we were getting a book party started at the office and there was some miscommunication.”
This left the anti-GOProud forces with five members, all of whom had participated in CPAC 2010.
Fast forward
to this, from National Journal’s Reid Wilson.
Social conservatives, including the National Organization for Marriage among others, staged a walk-out at a meeting of board members of the Conservative Political Action Conference, according to multiple board members, to protest CPAC’s decision to allow GOProud to join the event as more than just a vendor organization… GOProud’s involvement at CPAC rises to the same level as other prominent conservative organizations, like the American Future Fund, Americans for Prosperity, Americans for Tax Reform, the Eagle Forum and Judicial Watch. Participating organizations, akin to sponsors of the event, are allowed into meetings at which speakers are chosen, giving them a higher level of access than vendor-level organizations.
CPAC organizers strongly suggest that this is overplayed. NOM, for example, is neither a board member – there are only three of those, David Keene, Millie Hallow, and Cleta Mitchell – or a participating organization of CPAC. “2010 was the first and only year they participated in CPAC,” said CPAC director Lisa De Pasquale. “They have not registered for 2011 and have not attended any planning meetings.” Participating organizations do not actually get votes on speakers, and while NOM has looked for help from the American Conservative Union’s board, it’s got only one like-minded GOProud critic – Mitchell – on the CPAC board.
This is one of those fights that produces wins for both sides – GOProud and the social conservatives – without any lasting consequences for either of them.
