The real power brokers speak
nytimes.com
January 16, 1999
THE POLITICS
Big Donors to G.O.P. Assert Leadership Lacks Direction
By RICHARD L. BERKE
PALM BEACH, Fla. -- Many of the Republican Party's most influential financial backers have castigated the party's chairman and congressional leadership at closed-door meetings here in the past few days, warning that they were sacrificing voters by failing to articulate a clear message while focusing on scandal and impeachment.
The views on the impeachment of President Clinton are not uniform. Some of the biggest donors told their party chairman on Thursday night that the impeachment trial had to be brought to an end. But a more common view was that Republicans in Congress have an obligation to see impeachment through. The mistake has been allowing their battle with Clinton to drown out all other issues, the contributors said.
Senate Republicans clearly have been hearing this last message. They have been going to extra lengths the last few days to demonstrate that they can carry out the government's work while conducting the trial.
At the resort meetings of big donors here, several participants said in interviews that they had confronted Jim Nicholson, chairman of the Republican National Committee, and other officials about their distress over how the party fared in the November elections. They said they had cited polls showing that the party's public approval ratings have dipped steadily as the impeachment proceedings against President Clinton go on.
"I remember scribbling in my notes, 'Do something!"' said Scott E. Luellen, president of a technology company in Falls Church, Va.
"There's a disconnect in the RNC right now about what we say and what we do on a host of issues," Luellen said. "We need leaders. Most of the comments were aimed at Mr. Nicholson -- he was at times defensive."
Nicholson, who faces a challenge to his re-election as party chairman next week but is expected to win, declined to acknowledge the serious concerns. Speaking on Friday about a meeting with Republican Eagles, a group of big donors, he said: "We had a good candid discussion. But it was categorically positive. We are going to have better message discipline about taxes, about improving our national defense."
But Mel Sembler, the Republican finance chairman, who was on a panel with Nicholson, acknowledged that donors were not pleased.
"There were a lot of complaints that we talked a good game but we didn't perform," Sembler said. "They said: 'Where were these tax cuts that we were talking about? Where are all those issues that we talked about? We're supposed to be doing things -- not just talking about them. What happened to this tax cut? The House passed a tax cut, it went over to the Senate, and it just sat there. Nothing happened. We not only have to craft messages; we have to execute them."'
The gathering at the luxurious Breakers Hotel of more than 100 members of the Republican Eagles -- those who donate at least $15,000 to the party every year -- was a reward for their generosity and an opportunity for contributors to mix with prominent politicians.
After the Eagles session, Nicholson attended a meeting here of even larger donors: members of Team 100, who have given at least $100,000. Some of them said they had cornered Nicholson at an event on Thursday night and warned that the party was making a mistake in prolonging the impeachment issue because it appealed only to already committed supporters.
And at a closed-door meeting of Team 100 on Friday, donors said they had expressed concerns to Nicholson that were similar to those voiced by the Eagles the day before. "There is a worry that we may allow ourselves to be portrayed as the impeachment party," said one participant in the Team 100 meeting, speaking on condition of anonymity. But, he said, most of the discussion was centered on one question: "What is the congressional agenda? What are you going to do about it?"
The donors are a critical constituency of the Republican Party. While no one overtly threatened to withhold support, the unspoken message at the meetings of the Eagles and Team 100 was that the party had better shape up or they could begin holding back.
"I just hope there's not a lot of apathy out there -- I hope they haven't given up," said Ted Welch, a veteran party fund-raiser who traveled here. "But there's concern among the donors that the approval rating of Republicans in Congress has gone down dramatically over the last few months and that since 1994 we have lost ground. We can't afford to lose more ground. Republicans are very concerned about that possibility."
While some Team 100 members expressed concern about the impeachment matter, participants said members of the Eagles did not specifically mention the party's handling of impeachment at their meeting with Nicholson. Several said they were resigned to the fact that Republican lawmakers had a duty to move forward with the trial, regardless of the impact on the party.
Sembler said that before the election, the party "test-marketed the impeachment issue to see if it would motivate our contributors -- it did not." He added, "Our base is interested in issues like cutting taxes, improving education and reducing crime and drugs."
Indeed, the consensus of many contributors here was that the party had a powerful message on cutting taxes, improving the military and reducing the size of the government, but had failed to convey
it to the public. The participants in the meetings here singled out Sen. Trent Lott of Mississippi, the
majority leader, and other party leaders in Congress for not pressing forward with an aggressive
agenda. There were no lawmakers from Washington at the meetings.
"More could have been done this last session," said Donald T. Branning, an Eagle who founded an
electronics manufacturing company in Gilbert, S.C. "It's disappointing that more legislation wasn't
passed."
Branning said that while Senate Republicans "have to do the right thing" and carry out the
impeachment trial, he expressed worry that it could drag out at the expense of the party. "It should
be an expeditious process," he said.
Sam Brunelli, an Eagle who is a lobbyist in Washington, said that if the party's low standing in the
polls "truly reflects the American people, then I'm very discouraged."
He added: "I don't think it's the lack of a message. It's a lack of communicating that message to
grass-roots America. It really is adjusting to governing. We don't want to speak at people; we need
to speak to people."
Refusing to become too glum about his party, Brunelli said: "I don't think it's a dark day for
Republicans. It's time to stand up for what we believe in."
No contributor interviewed here expressed delight that the Republican Party is at all mixed up in the
impeachment matter. "Do you know anybody who enjoys what we're going through?" Brunelli
asked. "I hate it."
One person who attended a meeting of Team 100 on Friday, speaking on condition of anonymity,
said several donors expressed deep concern about the party's direction. "You lose five or six races
and everybody wants to get under the hood," he said. "Everybody recognizes that with impeachment
you just don't turn it off. But they are concerned that it defines the party."
Sembler, who made his fortune building shopping centers, and several other business executives here
likened the private meeting he had with Eagles to that of stockholders standing up to their corporate
board. "These are our investors, these are our stockholders," he said, adding that they asked him
and Nicholson, "What are we going to do to improve our performance?"
Some contributors were not satisfied with the answers.
"It felt like a shareholders meeting," Luellen said. "The participants were reporting some quarterly
losses. But the leadership seemed to focus on their accomplishments instead of all the things that
aren't going well. In business, that's how you fail."
David A. Bardes, an estate planner in Vero Beach, Fla., said: "Some asked tough questions. But
they're entitled to. It's no more contentious than the Democrats talking to Clinton about what he has
done to them." |
