In the time since Randy Pullen was elected chairman of the Arizona Republican Party, Democrats seem to have capitalized on their momentum from the 2006 elections, outperforming Republicans in terms of both fundraising and voter registration. But Pullen said the Republican Party is positioned to storm back in the second half of the current election cycle.
The challenges facing the GOP in Arizona aren’t unique to this state, either, he said. Rather, he points to a significant divide among Republican voters and their elected officials that has impacted Republican parties nationwide. Pullen said the divide is over immigration policy, and he credits what he foresees as an Arizona GOP turnaround to his public opposition to the failed immigration plan in Congress earlier this year.
Pullen spoke with Arizona Capitol Times on Dec. 17 and weighed in on fundraising, voter registration, employer sanctions and the upcoming presidential primary election.
Where does the Republican Party stand after your first 11 months at the helm≠
I think we’re very well-positioned going into the election year. I’ve been all over the state meeting with Republicans at all of our legislative and county levels. There’s a lot of excitement, a lot of energy.
The way I like to typically characterize it is I think the Democrats had a very good first half of the game and I think we’re coming into the second half and it’s going to change dramatically. I say that because I’ve been all over the state talking to Republicans.
There’s a lot of concern, a lot of angst, a lot of disappointment from rank-and-file Republicans that, having control of Congress as well as the White House, we didn’t get much accomplished. I think that was reflected in the 2006 election, when we lost a number of seats here in Arizona, in the Legislature as well as congressional seats. I think that reflects the overall feeling of the Republican Party across the country.
I talked to national committeemen from other states and other state chairmen and they’ve had exactly the same situation, so what we’re experiencing here in Arizona is not uncommon with what’s gone on in the rest of the country.
I know some of the angst a lot of people had a year ago when you were campaigning to be chairman was the party’s ability to raise funds under your leadership. Recent reports show the Democratic Party has raised considerably more than your party in the past year. What do you attribute that to, and what is the outlook for the rest of this election cycle≠
Let’s take it in two pieces. The first part is the Democrats raising more money. This is not a phenomenon in Arizona. This is going on all over the country. Democrats are doing a very good job of energizing their base and generating contributions. That’s why I said they had a very good first half. They really did springboard off of their ’06 successes in terms of increasing their funding.
Here in Arizona, we’ll finish out the year — we will not in total revenues and contributions have as much as in 2005. We’ll be relatively close to 2003. It has been more difficult, for a number of reasons.
For one, in general, the Republican rank and file have been upset with the party. And it’s not just in Arizona. Look at the NRCC (National Republican Congressional Committee) numbers, which are down, and other states have similar situations.
I think, personally, I did a pretty good job of raising money. One of the raps against me was I wouldn’t personally be able to raise money for the party. I think I’ve done a fairly good job of that, compared to prior years. I think that’ll be reflected in the year-end numbers.
Where we have fallen down is in contributions from small donors, which I think reflects the national trend, and, second of all, in events, and that’s driven by a different situation.
What happened the first half of the year versus what’s happened in the second half is like night and day. The small contributors weren’t giving in the first half of the year, but since September we’ve noticed a significant increase in small donor contributions to the party, to the extent that we will, in fact, do as well in telemarketing as we have in prior years.
Where we will not have caught up is in the direct mail. But direct mail in the second half of the year is substantially better than where it was at the same time two years ago.
What that means is that, moving into 2008, from our perspective, the rank-and-file Republicans will be, once again, very strongly donating to the party. I think that personal fundraising that I do will be good next year. And the Finance Committee — we have 20 members who have committed to raising at least $10,000 apiece next year.
The one area that has been a problem has been doing events. Our events are a little bit behind what they were in prior years. Part of that has been that it’s been difficult for us to get major national speakers to come in and speak (for) us at the state-party level.
Why≠
Well, I’m not really sure. We’ve had a number of them lined up who have later cancelled out. There’s a lot of scuttlebutt out there and rumors about what’s going on, but I can’t confirm any of it. All I can tell you is we lined up several major national, prominent speakers to come in and they cancelled. Although we did have Fred Thompson here a couple weeks ago and we had a nice luncheon for him.
I think going into next year, one of my major focuses will be that we get the kind of fundraising from major events that we should as a party.
In terms of voter registration, Democrats have also outpaced Republicans. Why is that, and what is the party’s strategy to change that trend≠
What’s happened not only in this state, but nationally, is a higher than normal number of Republicans re-registered as independents in this past cycle. I think the Democrat numbers were up, too, but not nearly like the Republican numbers were. That has been a factor.
I think it once again goes back to the overall dissatisfaction that’s being expressed with the national party, but the state level is where it comes home.
I think that is changing, too. Our registration efforts in the past couple months have borne fruit and it’s going to show much better going into the new year. We spent more money on voter registration through November than has ever been spent in any other off-year in this century, and by a significant amount.
It really started in May, when we saw a huge increase in the number of Republicans re-registering as independents. I tie it all to the comprehensive immigration bill that was introduced in the Senate in May. Our experience during May and June was that over 98 percent of the calls we received here — and we had over 6,000 calls, letters and e-mails — were totally opposed to the Senate bill. Vehemently. We had people coming in here, ripping up their registration cards.
The re-registration as independents carried through until August, and then it started to subside in September. I think 85 percent of the Republican base — of the party nationally, not just in Arizona — were opposed to that bill in the Senate.
I think that was a huge issue in this state that I had to deal with personally, and I still believe to this day that, by taking as strong a position on that bill as I did was the right thing to do for the party. I think that,
subsequently, Senator Kyl and Senator McCain have come around and said that we need to secure the border before we do anything else.
I think that has been very helpful to have them come around and say they agree with that position.
What is the state party’s stance on the immigration issue, at both a congressional and local level≠
The party’s passed a couple of different resolutions at state meetings. Essentially, the party calls for securing the border by all means available, including using the military.
That resolution was passed by the state party in January of 1996. That same resolution was passed by the national party in August. I introduced that resolution at the national level, and it was almost unanimously passed.
Sen. Jon Kyl was critical of the party’s stance on such a divisive issue under your leadership in a recent Capitol Times interview. He said, ‘When the party itself got involved in the illegal immigration issue, it seemed to me that it exceeded its role because, clearly, Republicans were divided. It’s just not a proper role for the political party to get into.’ He contends the party exists to get Republicans elected, not declare stances on issues. What is your response to that≠
My response is the party was divided: 85 percent agreed with me and 15 percent agreed with him. I’d rather be with the 85 than the 15, quite frankly.
And, quite frankly, that’s the position of the national party, too, so I guess if he has a bone to pick with me, he’s picking that with national Chairman Mike Duncan, as well as the executive committee of the RNC.
What do you think of the employer sanctions law that the Legislature passed earlier this year≠
The party supported it in a resolution last January and I went on record as agreeing with it by testifying at the (legislative committee) hearing of the employer sanctions law, H2779. I think that the bill that ultimately came out of the Legislature was a fair, reasonable bill and gives employers the opportunity to correct problems. It also gives them some leeway with respect to a safe harbor by using the (E-Verify) system for new hires.
I think there’s a couple minor things that need to be changed, which I think will probably get changed.
What are those≠
I think being able to have an anonymous phone call initiate an investigation is probably inappropriate. Certainly, there needs to be a name associated with it and it needs to be a clear and very straightforward complaint, just like any other complaint that would be filed by a citizen, regardless of what the law is. I think we should follow the normal process that’s followed in our judicial system. The person who makes the complaint should have their name associated with it.
What about the two possible sanctions measures that could be on the ballot in 2008≠
We haven’t taken a stance, and I seriously doubt the party will.
Personally, I don’t believe the initiative that’s called LAW (Legal Arizona Workers) that’s a one-strike-and-you’re-out would be a fair, reasonable law. What really concerns me about it is, if it’s passed by the citizens, it can’t be changed very easily by the Legislature and we’ll be stuck with it.
I didn’t like it to begin with. I didn’t think it would be a good law, and I still think that. It would not be something that would benefit the state of Arizona.
The other initiative, I don’t think much of it, personally. It basically completely overturns the current law. It actually would give the employers more cover than they have right now, before the new law goes into effect Jan.1. I don’t think it serves Arizonans, either.
You’ve worked closely with Don Goldwater and Russell Pearce in the past. Does your opposition to their LAW initiative hurt your relationship with them and others in the party who support the hard-line, one-strike stance≠
Russell Pearce and I are friends and we talk on a regular basis, and I think Russell Pearce agrees with me that the law passed by the Legislature is superior to the LAW initiative. But I think at this point there’s also concern out there that, if the other initiative that’s supported by the Chamber of Commerce can actually be on the ballot, there needs to be something more conservative, which is what LAW is, on the ballot, so there are competing initiatives on the ballot.
I would prefer that neither initiative were on the ballot. I think the law we have is fine. It can be fixed by the Legislature if there are any real problems with it from a pure technical perspective, and I think it’s the right thing to do. Don Goldwater and I talk on a regular basis, but we absolutely, totally disagree on this point. He thinks that LAW should replace the current law. Russell Pearce doesn’t disagree (with me) on it.
The business community has been very vocal in its opposition to the sanctions law. Businesses have been core supporters of the Republican Party for decades …
They still are.
What are some of the possible pros and cons of the party supporting the employer sanctions law, when you look at the relationship with businesses≠
Let’s not forget the fact that the vast majority of Arizonans support this employer-workplace enforcement. Don’t forget the Democrats supported this, also, and a Democratic governor signed it. This has been a problem that’s been going on for 20 years and has not been addressed by the federal government.
To a certain degree, Arizona’s kind of a Petri dish for illegal immigration reform. So I think it’s incumbent upon all of us to try and make this law work. I think that the business community, hopefully, will see over the next couple months that it does work and that there are no serious unintended consequences of it and they’ll essentially get over it.
I can understand their consternation over it. It’s a change. One thing the business community doesn’t like is changes that they don’t know what the outcome might be, and that’s understandable, because businesses want a stable environment.
Who do you think will win the Arizona presidential preference primary election≠
That’s a great question. We did some polling just a few weeks ago of likely voters in Arizona. Amongst Republicans, it pretty much was a dead heat among Romney, Giuliani and Senator McCain.
Now, what happened in 2000 — and I think we’ll see that again this time — is we’ll see a number of independents register Republican to vote in the primary and I think that might favor Senator McCain.
What will it take for a candidate to win in Arizona≠
All of the Republican candidates I can think of are all for securing the border, so from that perspective, immigration almost becomes a non-issue. They have some different ideas after that, but I think the core issues of securing the border, they’re all on the same side of that.
If none of them come here and campaign before Feb. 5, I would expect Senator McCain to win. If one or more come here and campaign, then the outcome might be different. But at this point, I would have to believe Senator McCain is going to win Arizona.
We talked earlier about the Democrats having a good first half of the game. Certainly, they are feeling their oats right now, after the success they had in last year’s elections, and say they will take control of the congressional delegation and capture the state House of Representatives. Look into your crystal ball and tell me what you see as the outcomes of the 2008 election.
I can be much more specific about the legislative races because I’m very involved in those on a regular basis. I think, at the end of the day, we’ll have at least 35 seats
in the House — which means we’ll gain — and there’s a possibility we’ll have 18 seats in the Senate.
That would be a gain of one in the Senate. Is that from retaking District 26 in Tucson≠
Yes.
What seats are you targeting in the House≠
I expect we’re going to get back District 11. We’re focusing on that very carefully. I expect that we’ll get a seat back in District 10. It is going to be a real battleground between the two parties. I think we should get a seat in (District) 23 and possibly one in Yuma (District 24).
So, I’ve named more than two, but there are a bunch of seats we’ve targeted. My expectation is that we’ll gain at least two.
I think the problem for the Democrats (nationally) is that it’s going to be very difficult for them to maintain their story that they had going into the 2006 elections, that they were the party that could govern, they were the party that could get things done and would strengthen out our international problems. I think that’s going to be pretty hard to continue to say, given what’s going on.
Voters have been reintroduced to the Democrats when they’re in control. They’ve found out that, if they thought Republicans were bad on earmarks, we’re not even close to what Democrats are. People are beginning to realize that again.
Thank you very much for your time.
You’re welcome.