10-19-2018 04:48:06 PM -0700
10-19-2018 02:33:10 PM -0700
10-19-2018 10:17:58 AM -0700
10-19-2018 07:06:00 AM -0700
10-18-2018 04:52:30 PM -0700
It looks like you've previously blocked notifications. If you'd like to receive them, please update your browser permissions.
Desktop Notifications are  | 
Get instant alerts on your desktop.
Turn on desktop notifications?
Remind me later.
PJ Media encourages you to read our updated PRIVACY POLICY and COOKIE POLICY.

The Need for a Political Investor Class

2. The impact of their investments

Conservative values and geography affect the impact. For example, if a week before the election Idaho state Representative Raul Labrador and Connecticut state Senator Dan Debicella had equal chances of defeating the Democratic freshmen they were challenging, donating to Labrador would make the most sense. Labrador would vote with conservative values more often than Debicella. In addition, if Debicella wins, Republicans will have to spend a lot of money to hold his seat, as this liberal district voted for Obama by a 60-40% margin. On the other hand, McCain won Labrador’s district 62-36%. If Labrador is successful, he should hold the seat for many years to come without additional out-of-state money.

Population size and other factors that increase campaign expenses have to be considered, particularly with Senate races. Many well-meaning conservative websites and groups urged people to send money to Assemblyman Chuck DeVore in his failed bid for the U.S Senate in California. Had DeVore won, he would have needed to raise tens of millions of dollars from grassroots conservatives to keep his campaign competitive in media-rich California. The resources it would have taken to help DeVore win the Senate seat would have meant far less conservative money for less expensive and more winnable seats in places like Nevada, Missouri, and Kentucky.

3. The effectiveness of their investments

Conservatives who want to support groups who will do a good job boosting overall Republican chances in the fall should consider the effectiveness of the RNC, the NRCC, the NRSC, and the Republican Governors Association over recent months.

Conservatives should also demand that groups that want their money be relentless in examining how effective their efforts are. For example, is Americans for Tax Reform’s taxpayer protection pledge actually effective in avoiding tax increases? Is the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) strengthening the conservative movement, or is it the conservative equivalent of a Star Trek convention?

These questions deserve to be answered, and few of these groups are even asking them. Pundits would be shocked if the American Conservative Union announced it would no longer sponsor CPAC because it wasn’t an effective use of money. However, if it’s not furthering the conservative cause, the American Conservative Union’s investors should expect nothing less.

If a group refuses to examine itself, and isn’t effective towards the end it’s supposed to serve, it falls to conservative investors to find organizations that will forward their values. Conservatives should no more invest in an ineffective organization than they would invest more money in a failing company with unresponsive and oblivious leadership.

In conclusion, a conservative political investor class will make the conservative movement better by introducing market forces into an arena that has been dominated by emotion rather than logic. This will lead to new ideas and new approaches to old problems. All grassroots conservatives have to do is demand it.