Gwen Eilers and Kim Lehman

The excellent blog, Iowa Defense Alliance has a post today entitled: The Hypocrisy is Astounding. In it they assert that Republican leaders in Iowa should be outraged at Clayton County Chair Gwen Eilers for her anti-Reed write in campaign rather than at Kim Lehman for Iowa Right to Life's anti Miller-Meeks article.

I want to say first that some of us were (and remain) outraged  by Eilers' anti-Reed write in campaign. Here is what I said on this blog:

Let me be absolutely clear on this: as a Republican leader, Eilers should support our candidate, Christopher Reed — or step down. Reed won the primary and he deserves our support.

There is no mechanism for the SCC to remove or otherwise punish a county chair. Only the Clayton County Central Committee or the 1st District Executive Committees (basically the county chairs and co-chairs form the first district) can remove Eilers. I hope they have the guts to do so!

As for Kim Lehman, let me state that I supported Kim in her campaign for National Committeewoman. I had a Lehman sticker on my jacket the day of the state convention and I spoke with many people urging them to support Kim.

The Iowa Defense Alliance is right. IRTL does not have to toe the Republican Party line. But since their Executive Director is also our National Committeewoman, the potential for conflict exists.

The reason this has become such a big issue is not so much that IRTL did not support Miller-Meeks. Rather they call Miller-Meeks, who declares that she is pro-life, a liar. While her opponent, Dave Lobesack is never even mentioned.

Loebsack answered his Project Vote Smart questionnaire:

"Abortions must remain safe, legal, and rare. A woman's right to choose must never be taken away, Roe v. Wade must never be overturned."

It is not simply the case that IRTL is not supporting our candidate. In the 2nd Congressional District race, IRTL has chosen to gratuitously attack the candidate who is by any objective measure, closer to their pro-life position, while giving a free pass to the incumbent who is unashamedly pro-abortion.

Every leader in the Republican Party needs to be aware of how their actions affect our candidates and our cause. [[That includes those of us who are bloggers!]] I believe that in this case, Kim felt that her integrity as Executive Director of Iowa Right to Life necessitated publication and distribution of this article.

In the week since this issue surfaced, I have struggled as to how I should respond. I and the other two Second District SCC members, issued a statement to our district last week. As I have watched the situation unfold, I have talked to activists in my district and across the state.

I now believe, that integrity demands, that Lehman either apologize to Miller-Meeks and step down as Executive Director of Iowa Right to Life, or that she step down from her position as National Committeewoman.

Comments

[Andy Cable-]

Well put Dave. Is unfortunate that we are spending any time going over these two examples of unnecessary inside fighting- especially 9 days before an important election.
Such back stabbing and bickering will not gain a single GOP vote and may well loose us many. We can not afford that happening.
These two examples should have no merit. We have properly chosen candidates for the US Senate and for Congress from the Second District. Elected GOP officials whether it be at the County or National level if they have differences should simply keep quiet if they do not fully support them. The time to "campaign" against them has come and gone.
After this election it will be imperative that we as Republicans quickly address our differences from county, district and state levels and come together. It will take leadership from our SCC and a willingness to be an inclusive party once again. If not two years will come all too fast and we will see even further problems I fear.

[Al]

David,
Let me be clear on this. I think that it is the height of hypocrisy to be outraged at one and not the other. The fact that these leaders remained so quiet in regards to Eilers and yet demand that Lehman resign points to the deep divisions that reside within the Republican Party of Iowa. Where were these leaders outrage and demands for a resignation when Gwen Eilers sent out an email urging people to write in Steve Rathje? They remained strangely quiet. I find their silence on that issue very strange don't you?

[Brent Oleson]

Good for you Dave. I like people who don't sit on the fence to please both sides. An apology or resignation puts the ball in Kim's court. Let's see how she responds. No response would tell us alot about her as well.

[Jeff]

The reason the beef is with Lehman and not IRTL is because the newsletter was sent from Lehman’s email address. That is the root of the problem. If the email had come from a different IRL email address I don’t think there would have been much said. What Eilers and Lehman did to our Republican nominees is terrible. We need to be focusing on their opponents.

[Andy Cable-]

apples and oranges I think- one came from a County Chair with little following outside her county and no power statewide. It was a lame attack and plan that gained no legs and did little damage outside of her image as a vindictive looser. While many of us felt the comments were wrong and said so - they were in general considered more ridiculous in nature.
Elected County GOP officials should be answerable to their counties. We had a Chair removed years ago for outrageous remarks- from within. In this case the County official was not answerable to any of us outside her county nor did we vote for her.
The second issue was raised by our recently elected National Committewoman who represents the entire state and promised at State Convention she would support all the candidates. It is both appropriate that the issue be discussed statewide and a consensus be taken.
The scale and accountability of the two issues are apples and oranges- and I feel the reponse toward each has been appropriate so far.

[Mike Sanders]

You're the best Dave Loebsack

[IowaFan]

I guess I'm working my butt off to get this republican (MMM) elected. Understanding your point, Reed was never going to beat Harkin in 2008; so I went about my MMM work.

But the Lehman issue is real - she must go. I will let someone else fight the other battle.

And I agree - a pity that we're spending valuable time right now discussing the shame of it all.

[Al]

Andy,

I have to respectfully disagree with you. The Eilers fiasco actually called for Republicans to vote for someone other than the nominee. As far as I can tell, the IRTL flier only stated their belief that Miller-Meeks was a fraud. They did not actively urge Republicans to write in a candidate. I believe that Republican Party leadership should have publicly asked for her resignation. They didn't, no big surprise there.

As for IowaFan. Why is that you think Reed was going to lose to Harkin. Maybe it is because of people like you that give up and don't try. Sorry, just calling it like I see it.

[Mike]

Al..

You and your ilk simply dont GET IT.

Kim Lehman has been making public statements ATTACKING Miller-Meeks even before the primary. She stated PUBLICLY on Steve Deace's radio show that she was a "wolf in sheep's clothing" and "not a pro-family candidate".

Really? The candidate Lehman was supporting at the time was a twice divorced pathological liar who had inflated his resume and had FINANCIALLY supported one of the most virulent pro-choice candidates to run for Congress in Iowa, Julie Thomas!

Yet they think a woman who's been married to the same man for 25 years, served in the military 24 years, two kids, a doctor...isn't a "pro-family" candidate.

IRTL members should have been asking for Lehman's head on a platter..

I don't believe a word Lehman's said concerning this issue. She's publically trashed Miller-Meeks before..and AL, you have to be a complete fool if you think that Lehman didn't have FINAL approval of the comments about Miller-Meeks coming from HER ORGANIZATION!

The issue here is very simple Al..and if you guys can't figure out..well..then I pity you.

Kim Lehman is now our NATIONAL COMMITTEEWOMAN. She's not a county chair...she's representing ALL REPUBLICANS in this state. And in her job as National Committeewoman..she should be out there SUPPORTING and WORKING for the election of ALL Republican candidates running on our ticket. PERIOD..no questions asked.

For her to make untrue, disparaging statements about a candidate on OUR ticket..20 DAYS from an election..is utterly and completely unacceptable under any circumstances.

David's right.. Kim Lehman needs to pick what hat she wants to wear...Either apologize to Miller-Meeks and step down from IRTL..or step down from being National Committeewoman.

She's made it quite clear that she's NOT able to support our candidates running on our ticket.

[Al]

Mike,

I would look in the mirror before calling anyone a fool. I see no evidence what so ever of Lehman personally making disparaging comments about a Republican candidate within 20 days of the election. Instead I see people jumping to conclusions about comments in the IRTL newsletter.

You are making assumptions based on absolutely no evidence whatsoever.

I am sorry that you cannot see this Mike.

[Trustee]

In an effort to help repair some of the damage regarding the whole MMM IRLC fiasco I sent the following message to her campaign:

Dear Ms Miller-Meeks:
I have just sent you a contribution in support of your candidacy against far left abortion proponent Congressman David Loebsack Consider it a good faith contribution which has been solidified by information by friends and acquaintances from your congressional district.

I am a Board Member of Iowa Right to Life Committee (IRLC) and I have been active in the right to life movement in Iowa since before Roe vs Wade. My history of advocating for and following the politics of the right to life issue in this state is lengthy. Accordingly it was with considerable dismay that I became aware of the treatment of your candidacy in an article published in the IRLC organization’s recent newsletter. Pro-life friends and acquaintances of mine who reside in your district who hold the right to life dear are even more dismayed. According to your responses some time ago to Project Vote Smart and posted on that organization’s web site you have what is commonly referred to as rape-incest and life of the mother exceptions as regards abortion restrictions. Your responses also indicate that you believe that federal tax dollars should be prohibited from being used on abortion procedures. The rape-incest exception is something right-to-lifers definitely oppose and is something we would like to dialogue with you about. We can refer you to a wealth of information about that issue including commentary by physicians and more than one advocate of the right to life who has spoken in our state who was conceived in such circumstances. The life of the mother exception however misunderstood as a practical medical – legal matter has not eliminated candidates from our full support nor that of the National Right to Life Committee PAC. I certainly applaud your opposition to the use of tax dollars to finance abortion. As a fellow Republican I understand well that what government finances – it fosters.

I can not explain nor defend the treatment given your candidacy in the IRLC newsletter. It has no historical precedent. From all I have seen it is regrettable, the tone unbecoming of the record offered. I hope my fellow board members will quickly get to the bottom of it. I offer you my personal support this general election. Feel free to use my personal endorsement. The information provided below is for purposes of identification only.

Roger Mall Davenport, Iowa
Right to life bio: My concern with the right to life issue dates back to 1969. In 1972 in my junior year in college I served as a state contact for the National Youth Pro-life Coalition. In my senior year immediately after Roe vs Wade I helped found Scott County Right to Life (now Quad City Right to Life) and have been a volunteer for it and other local pro-life women and pregnancy support organizations since then. For thirty-three years I served on the Executive Committee of state (Iowa) right to life organizations. I resigned from the Iowa Right to Life Executive Committee in September of 2008. I also served on the Executive Committee and was the Treasurer of the National Right to Life Committee for eight years with a total of 28 years as Iowa’s Director to that organization.

[IowaFan]

Al,

Christopher Reed is a nice guy, some day he may make a great candidate. During the primary he was a horrible speaker, still has a horrible website and was not raising any money.

Unfortunately the money thing is the measure of a successful candidacy.

Maybe it's just me but I can only manage actively working on 2 maybe 3 campaigns at a time during the season, so there are choices. Reed didn't make my cut. I think those choices are more about Chris than me. Maybe his next campaign will be different.

However, I don't disagree that the Reed/Rathje issue is similar... just was not high on my radar screen so I never took the time to squawk.

That's all I'm sayin'...

[MarineG-ma]

I feel both women should resign NOW. We have a hard enough time getting Republican candidates elected in this state and to have these two speaking out against them is just WRONG! Mrs Lehman I ask for your resignation now you are an embarrassment. Dr. Mariannette Miller-Meeks is Pro-Life she has stated it more than once. She is not a liar.

[Robert]

Kim "Loebsack" Lehmen

[Andy Cable-]

Al
appreciate your response but a little confused when you say the Republican leadership should ask for her resignation. Eilers? Lehman? Both?
I also thnk you miss the jest of my letter. I was not saying either were right or less gulity-just that the effects statewide and the visibility and stature of each must be taken into consideration.
Obviously a County Chair has no where near the following or public recognition as that of a National Committeewoman. It had a short life and was not treated statewise with any real legitmacy. The second problem was much more publicized and divisive at the state level. If you really believe that the statement in the IRTL flyer did not come from Lehman or have her complete 100% approval then I think you are a little naive.
I called for no specific action in either case at this time- We have elections to win and such internal feuding only does the Democrats any good. Starting Nov 5th we have plenty of time to sort out the ramifications of both issues and hopefully with cooler heads prevailing make the proper decisions on where each should lead.

[Al]

Andy,

I completely agree with you about the internal feuding.
I was content to let sleeping dogs lie until after the election. It seems though that other people don't want to. If you will notice we were relatively quiet on the issue until we had a chance to review all the available information. Then we weighed in on the issue.

[Matt]

I think both women should go too. Though I can see the SCC not diverting money to Reed if they don't think it's a viable race, to publicly tell people to write in Rathje is wrong - and I voted for Rathje in the primary.

I'm quite ticked the way the religous right groups inserted Reed at the last minute and ran him against just-as-conservative Rathje...and then proceeded to run one of the worst campaigns I've ever seen against a high value target like Harkin.

Nonetheless, Reed is a good conservative and deserves whatever support people feel led to give him. As someone in an official position within the GOP, she needs to support our candidates.

Gwen Eilers needs to go.

As for Marianette I can tell you that she is absolutely pro-life. I am disgusted at Kim Lehman for taking MMM's comments and twisting them. As someone noted above, Lehman was a rabid supporter of Teahen, a known and proven pathological liar who not only supported a very pro-abortion candidate 6 years ago, but also presented himself as a moderate on the issue till he realized he needed to run farther right.

There is no way that as Executive Director she didn't know what the newsletter said. She gave herself away because the 'evidence' she used against MMM in the newsletter was identical to the 'evidence' Peter Teahen used in one of his mailers. I got that mailer myself a couple of weeks before the end of the primary and caught the verbatim language right away.

If you want to attack GOP candidates as a member of a RTL activist group, fine. If you want to be National Committee Chairwoman for the GOP and support our candidates, fine. But you don't get to do both.

Kim Lehman needs to go.

[neighhay]

I don't understand why it presented a a conflict for Kim Lehman to send out an email expressing her view of Miller-Meeks WHEN KIM LEHMAN SENT THE LETTER OUT WEARING HER IRTL HAT!

N.B.Lehman did not send the letter out while wearing her National Committeewoman hat.

I think Lehman is entitled to her opinion and I don't think she should be silenced just because others do not agree with her view.

I have read that Lehman "lied" in her estimation of Miller-Meeks, but I think that is an overreaction. A "lie" is hard to prove--"opinion" is more the word that is in order here.

If Kim Lehman had sent the letter out under the auspices of the Iowa GOP it would be an entirely different matter.

For my part, I can't say Dr. Miller- Meeks is pro-abortion but from what I can figure out from her rhetoric, she is a bit of a distance from my "opinion" of pro-life.

But then again, that is my opinion. It's a bad move to try to shut people up when you do not like their opinions: just ask one of our presidential candidates!

[Darren]

The problem is that it is the same person who is head of IRl and is also the National Committee Woman.

It is schizophrenic to believe that it is two different people.

It is also possible that sometime in the future IRL may come across the situation where there may be a pro-life Democrat running against a pro-abortion Republican. What does she do then?

I wouldn't want to be in that position to make that decision if I were Lehman but her two positions can be in direct conflict.

What makes this situation as bad as it is is that MMM is clearly the more prolife of the two candidates and yet IRL sends a very nasty sounding letter blasting her.

The tone was part of the problem. They could have been more diplomatic but it appears there is something personal about their insulting method of undermining a very good Republican candidate. It makes no sense from any perspective.

Lehman should resign.

[Roger Mall]

"It is also possible that sometime in the future IRL may come across the situation where there may be a pro-life Democrat running against a pro-abortion Republican. What does she do then?" Indeed historically that situation has not been unusual in an election cycle, indeed IRL has welcomed Democrat support and has depended on it on occasion in order to pass some bills.

With regard to electoral politics one case in point is Jim Leach who Loebsack defeated. When Leach was in the First District he at one time was opposed by a sincere if confused pro-life Democrat Bill Gluba, now Mayor of Davenport. Pro-abortion Republican Maggie Tinsman was at one time opposed by a sincere if confused pro-life Democrat - Tom Fritsche. There are other examples out there but those were close to me.

Kim Lehman has put herself in an untenable position as far as either organization is concerned. Now one can perhaps argue that IRL in its PAC activities should only support Republican candidates because the Party is pro-life and the Democrat party is pro-abortion even if individual candidates in either Party do not reflect their Party platform. On can save the discussion about the practicality of that for another day because in an erratic twist Kim Lehman dragged or allowed IRL to be dragged into opposing the far superior Republican candidate!!

From all appearances the action was incredible. One can speculate that it resulted from a vendetta of some sort, a huge dereliction, the organization sand-bagged by a bums rush from staff, or the organization was confounded. Certainly the whole matter is further aggravated and all the more embarrassing by lack of formal repudiation or correction. If the IRL Board, of which I am a member, is at fault from dereliction than it needs to be so explained. And realize that Mxs Lehman is a member of the IRL Board as well.

My view is that Ms Lehman's position as a high pro-file member of the RNC is untenable with the proper functioning of her various roles with IRL and should never have been allowed. Non-profit boards have every right to guard against conflicts of interest, which are not limited to pecuniary interests in my judgment. Her function as an RNC member is subject to the RPI's evaluation of propriety. And again it would have similar rights, indeed obligations in my judgment.

Volunteer boards, indeed boards in general, can be criticized for indolence or conversely lack of focus,and it is also unbecoming when they become staff driven affairs. I think that is the situation here and it needs to be corrected. I really do not think IRL is any worse than most boards, but this is a situation where things were allowed to get way out of hand.

[IowaFan]

the irony remains if the IRTL letter had NO MENTION of MMM, NONE of this would be in discussion today.

This is SADLY taking up way too much of our time during a critical election cycle.

Lehman must leave her position on the SCC and resign from the Committee Woman position; Sooner rather than later.

[rogermall]

You are correct. It is not only very unlikely that it would have been an issue at RPI it is also unlikely that it would have been an issue on the IRL Board, although hopefully it would have been because of what should be the desire to help vastly superior candidates and the failure to accurately reflect a candidate's position.

It is problematic also because of the clumsiness of the editorializing; the inconsistency as pointed out elsewhere as regards other candidates, perhaps the liberties taken with the emphasis on an issue that is unclear,(sex education - as opposed to abortion as birth control). I for one did not realize IRL had a position specifically addressing abstinence only curricula as a PAC endorsement issue. The organization has tried to limit itself to the right to life per se, direct funding and certain regulatory aspects.

As suggested elsewhere it would have been far better to accurately reflect the position of the candidates and leave it at that.

[found on essential estrogen]

Our National Committeewoman
Kim Lehman has been under fire by several central committees. Once again, the Republicans are eating our own. I've heard many complaining, Senator Hahn and Representative Kauffman. Why not Marianette Miller-Meeks? Did it matter to her? If it did why hasn't she spoken up?

Kim, please do not resign. You were fairly elected and the disgruntled members of the party should not be allowed to harrass you into resigning.

I wonder what they will do when we have a gay man or lesbian that is a candidate for our party here in Iowa. It's rather certain the same members yelping about Kim not agreeing with a candidate will be the first ones opposing a homosexual candidate.

Stupidity like this is one reason we have never broken the glass ceiling in Iowa.

Tags:GOP Lehman