The case against Chanel Prunier

Printed from: https://newbostonpost.com/2016/03/31/the-case-against-chanel-prunier/

For the 90 percent of Massachusetts citizens who are not registered Republicans, the conflict within the state GOP must be hard to fathom. We have a popular governor who is moderate, successful, and great at raising money. One would think that Republicans would all get behind him in order to profit from the incredible resources he brings to a party that desperately needs them. Yet, we have seen resistance to Baker.

After more than a year of this, the governor began to renovate the state party. He backed a slate of candidates for the state committee, many of whom won. He now has a firm majority of support there, including conservatives who are realistic about our state politics.

The next step is the election of a new Republican National Committeewoman. Baker is backing State Representative Keiko Orrall against the incumbent Committeewoman, Chanel Prunier.

Why has Baker been so aggressive? A review of the history may provide insight.

The source of the conflict in our state party is mostly ideological. Although we live in the most famously liberal state in America, and have the most moderate Republican primary electorate in America (thanks to all the reliable Republican-voting independents), some Massachusetts Republicans insist that the MassGOP should stand for social conservativism. The rest of the party — including liberal Republicans, as well as moderates and pragmatic conservatives — understand that we need a more moderate brand in order to be successful in this bluest state.

In February 2014, a month before our big convention, the Massachusetts Republican State Committee passed a disgraceful party platform that was against gay marriage, against abortion, and made government subservient to religion and included a statement about how activists can pursue an anti-gay marriage ballot initiative. Outrageous.

The platform gained media attention, and was immediately disavowed by our party chairman, by Charlie Baker, and by our federal candidates for the House and Senate. Riddled with bad ideas, errors, and sophomoric language, it was a farce that caused laughter among the state’s political class. But it also created problems for our most promising candidates, including congressional candidate Richard Tisei, who was shocked to find out his recent marriage to a man officially had no value to his party.

When Charlie Baker won the governorship and saved our party from irrelevance on Beacon Hill, our state committee didn’t host a celebration, but immediately went on the attack. They moved to challenge our party chairman, and also to censure Baker’s mentor, former Governor Bill Weld, for the minor transgression of endorsing a Democrat for the state legislature, who was defeated anyway. Thankfully, Weld’s name was taken off the censure resolution, and Baker beat back opposition to his choice for party chairman. Yet it was clear that many party officials are not very supportive of our new governor.

Governor Baker’s incredible first year did little to solve the problems among some party officials. In February 2015, we saw an article in the Boston Globe where Committeewoman Prunier and a member of our state committee challenged the governor for supporting gay marriage, an issue that has now been settled permanently outside of the MassGOP state committee. That state committee member even called Baker’s views “traitorous.”

Prunier is probably the most well-known and vocal opponent of gay marriage in this state. The Boston Globe even has referred to her as an “anti-gay-marriage” activist. She publicly attacked Baker’s support for gay marriage as “unwise and damaging to party leaders.” She was also on the MassGOP platform committee, and insisted on language in there against gay marriage.

To keep fighting this battle as a political matter, long after it has been permanently settled is poisonous to our party brand and candidates and should disqualify Prunier from being a party leader all by itself.

But there are other problems with Prunier.

Just a few months ago, Prunier wrote an op-ed in the NewBostonPost, using her party title, in which she challenged Governor Baker to be more like his predecessor, Deval Patrick – meaning that he should govern more ideologically. In a veiled threat, Prunier said that Baker’s failure to pander to the base may “leave moderate and conservative supporters of many stripes unsatisfied and potentially seeking something more in future candidates.” It is unimaginable that an RNC member of any state would publicly criticize a sitting governor in her own party like that.

The source of Prunier’s conflicts is her work for other political organizations. For example, she has been involved with the Coalition for Marriage and Family, which strongly opposes gay rights and abortion, and the Massachusetts Republican Assembly, which seems to oppose nearly everything. Those organizations, with her full support, often fund anti-establishment candidates in Republican primaries that cannot possibly win a general election and merely drain resources from more electable candidates who have to fight them off. There’s nothing wrong with the Coalition backing candidates with whom they agree. But can you imagine a Massachusetts DNC member backing a protest candidacy in a primary against a more electable candidate? How about several of them in one year? That’s what we have seen repeatedly in the MassGOP.

These conflicts of interest have made Prunier a polarizing figure. Some days, Prunier supports mainstream candidates, other days, she supports anti-establishment candidates who can’t win. This double game has irritated many in the party and is one reason that she is being challenged for her position in April.

State Representative Keiko Orrall, who seeks to replace Prunier, shares many of Prunier’s policy views. But Orrall has made it clear that as Committeewoman, she will operate as a team player. Orrall is respected as a state representative, and is well-liked by Republicans of all types. She will not be a divisive figure or moonlight for competing organizations.

Prunier’s defenders will say debate is needed and that the establishment must be challenged. But senior party officials, by definition, are the establishment. They are not supposed to undermine it from within. Prunier, is of course, free to continue to challenge the establishment – but she should do so as a private citizen.

Ed Lyons

Ed Lyons

Ed Lyons is a Republican activist who has written often about the MassGOP. He can be found on Medium and Twitter as @mysteriousrook.