You are on page 1of 14

The NewMassPlaybook A Plan to Enhance the Viability of Massachusetts Republican Party Statewide Candidates

Offered By Arc Angel Communications

December, 2012

Page 1 of 14

The goal of the New Mass Playbook is to have Massachusetts Republican candidates, particularly those running statewide, win more races. Obviously, the Results of Republican statewide candidates have been disappointing and certainly, we all agree that the Commonwealth of Massachusetts would be better served by some semblance of viable two-party government. The Massachusetts Republican Party has fallen back into the political abyss. With no statewide office holders, only a handful of Legislators and a party enrollment that is simply not large enough to allow for any meaningful victories for the foreseeable future. Now, the question becomes, how can the MassGOP return to relevance in Massachusetts politics? The answer is a mix of old and new, of cutting edge and tried and true. Leading our party back from the brink of extinction and into prominence will not be easy, but nothing so noble is simple to achieve. If we believe that government is formed of the people, by the people and for the people, then it is now our duty to stand up, organize and rally to form a loyal opposition. Make no mistake, our lack of success falls squarely on the collective shoulders of everyone in our big tent. Indeed, the failures of many have led to losses for us all. While some seek satisfaction in blaming each other for past disappointments, I believe that we must set aside resentment and instead learn from the past so that we can avoid repeating it. Somewhere down the line we got lost. The collective consciousness of the MassGOP has strayed from many of our core principles, lured away by intoxicating and fleeting tastes of power. As a result, the membership of the MassGOP has fallen overboard and is now drifting aimlessly, awash in a sea of ambiguity. While some recent successes have lifted our hopes, it is now apparent that those victories have not been buoyant enough to bring our candidates, our platform and our ideals back into the realm of political relevance. We, as a party, those who believe in the ideals of self-reliance, conservative values, smaller government and fiscal discipline must rally together to bring these principles forward on behalf of the people of Massachusetts. The essence of these principles remains attractive to the voters who elected three out of the past four Governors on a popular platform. There are glimmers of hope, but let us not fool ourselves into believing that we can realistically expect to win statewide elections. Certainly, the MassGOP has had a problem winning statewide elections for decades. Consider the case of Alonzo B. Cook, the last Republican to be Auditor of the Commonwealth. He held office from 1915-1931. 81 years is a longtime to go without winning an Auditors race. Perhaps you could consider another Cook? The last Republican Secretary of State was Frederic Cook who served from 1921-1949, which means that the MassGOP has gone 63 years without a successful candidate for Secretary of State. The list goes on and on43 years is the drought for Attorney General and a person with the qualifications of Eliot Richardson is not walking through the door anytime soon. Take a look at other offices where we have been relatively successful. The last Republican Treasurer was Joe Malone. He served from 1991-1999. Prior to Malone, the previous Republican Treasurer was Laurence Curtis who served from 1947-1949. So the MassGOP has gone 13 years without a successful candidate for Treasurer and have only elected two over the span of 63 years. Let us consider our current Republican U.S. Senator Scott Brown who has served since 2010-2012. Prior to his election the last Republican Senator was Ed Brooke 1967-1979, and prior to that it was Henry Cabot Lodge 1947-1953. As a result the MassGOP had gone 33 years
Page 2 of 14

without a successful General Election candidate for U.S. Senate and has only had two win General Elections in the past 65 years. Clearly, as both history and data reveal, the MassGOP has had an awful record of electing Republicans to statewide office during the past half century and with the current playbook in place the prospects for the coming fifty years seem equally as bleak. The time has come to significantly alter the MassGOP tactics and strategies for statewide elections. We should embark on a public service campaign of showing voters the while the lure of enabling a viable two party government in Massachusetts may not be enough to convince a large portion of the electorate to vote Republican it may appeal to some. More importantly, the battle cry of establishing two party government is an excellent example of putting forth a public policy issue/agenda that is a low risk high reward proposition. We must not lose sight of the reason for political parties in the first place. Indeed, the reason our democracy has political parties is to represent a certain set of beliefs that may or may not be held by groups of voters. With all due respect to the Minority Leaders in both the House and the Senate, the Republican caucus lacks the ability to significantly alter debate because the votes just are not there. Having worked in the Senate, I remember long debates where we were on the right side of the issue but at the end of the debate the Republicans just simply did not have enough votes to matter. This factor is a significant illustration for a couple of reasons. Most importantly it emphasizes the whole motivation of why elections matter. As a party, we should be sending clear messages to voters that our party platform contains both ideas and ideals that have merit and are worthy of their support and vote. Secondly, we should not simply settle for debate for the sake of it, but instead focus the arguments around how our MassGOP party principles can help improve the lives of the people of Massachusetts. It sounds simple, but the MassGOP must make a more compelling case of why people should vote Republican. We must elevate our appeals to voters and present positive reasons to join and vote for the MassGOP.

Urban Challenges Remain As was the case in 2010, once again the election results reveal that the MassGOP failed to compete in the states major urban areas. Further, the biggest problem facing the Mass GOP and our candidates is the lack of competition in the major urban areas of the state. The Brown campaign cannot expect to win a statewide election and lose the City of Boston by nearly 120,000 votes. Take a look at the results from the 10 largest urban communities and you will find that Brown lost these 10 communities by over 280,000 votes. Now consider that Brown lost the election by a little more than 232,000 votes and you can easily realize that these epic losses in urban areas continue to be too much for the MassGOP to overcome. Large amounts of historical data explicitly indicate that our candidates, with few exceptions, are consistently losing the urban areas by very large amounts and cannot count on more than a few small communities to serve as their base. We must recognize that the Democrats possess a Built In advantage in numbers, both in terms of voter enrollment and office holders. In fact, Democrats outnumber Republicans 3 to 1 statewide and by even larger numbers throughout these urban areas. According to the Secretary of States Office, as of 10/17/2012, the total amount of Registered Voters is 4,342,841.
Page 3 of 14

There are 1,551,693 registered Democrat, 484,099 registered Republican and 2,83,273 registered Unenrolled. The corresponding percentages are 35.7% Democrat, 11.1% Republican and 52.6% Unenrolled. Furthermore, the Democrats have controlled every Constitutional Office since 2006 and many of those office holders are from urban districts. Clearly, the MassGOP must make a concerted effort to enroll more voters as Republicans. Consider this, since the 1990 MassGOP Wave, the states population has risen from 6,016,425 to 6,547,629, which represents a net gain of 531,204 residents. Over the same period of time the states population of enrolled voters has risen from 3,213,763, to 4,342,841, which represent a net gain of 1,129,078 voters. So, even though Massachusetts has added a half million residents, we have more than doubled that amount through persons registering to vote. Another interesting element of these voter enrollment trends appears when you look at the parties, or lack of, that people are choosing to enroll in. Democrat and Republican enrollment percentages have stayed consistent and are close to each other, which represents an approximate 17% increase since 1990. However, the ranks of unenrolled voters continue to climb. Massachusetts currently has 2,283,373 unenrolled voters, which is an increase of 931,308 more unenrolled voters since 1990a stunning 69% increase. This statewide data demonstrates the disparity between Republicans, Democrats and the unenrolled. But let us also consider some results from the City of Boston. As the largest population center in New England, Boston has long been a bastion for Democrat success. With 255 precincts spread throughout 22 Wards, the vote totals from the City of Boston are larger than the next five largest communities combined, Worcester, Springfield, Newton, Cambridge and Quincy. So, candidates that want to be successful must contend better in the City of Boston. Yet, a look at recent MassGOP campaign results from the City of Boston reveal a systemic lack of success. Scott Brown was only able to win one out of the 22 wards, ward 6. Elizabeth Warren was able to win 21 out of 22 wards, and took many of those by exceedingly high margins such as 96% to 3%. Take Ward 12, precinct 1 for an example where Warren got 1,060 votes to Browns 31 votes, which represents a vote differential of 1,029 votes. A comparison to this would be the election results from the entire Town of Sturbridge where Brown received 3,142 votes to Warrens 2,106. So, Brown had to win the entire Town of Sturbridge to make up for one of the 255 precincts lost within the City of Boston.

Negative Equity Campaigns The MassGOP has taken part in a troubling trend of contributing resources to featured campaigns that run Negative Equity Campaigns. A Negative Equity Campaign is a political campaign that finishes an election cycle with less value than when the campaign began. Election Day comes and goes and too often the MassGOP candidates are on the losing end. Well, not only are the candidates on the losing end, but so too are their campaigns. Consider this, Scott Brown spent approximately $30 million on his campaign and Charlie Baker spent approximately $9 million, yet we, as a party, have next to nothing to show for it. Members of the MassGOP should get some return on their investment of support, but instead Republicans continue to support candidates and campaigns that leave little to no resources for the next generation of campaigns. This equity drain is not a recipe for future success. We must endeavor to build and carry over a prescribed amount of equity from cycle to cycle for the betterment of the MassGOP as a whole.
Page 4 of 14

A Plan for Future Growth and Success This ten point plan is a way to get the MassGOP back to statewide viability. 1. Increase GOP voter enrollment from 11% to 20% by 2018 a. Math problem b. Target new voter and minority demographics 2. Follow strategies based on the NewMassPlaybook a. Candidate recruitment, candidate funding formula b. Campaign on precinct level, compete everywhere, encourage primaries c. Poll for and align issues with appeals to younger and minority voters 3. Begin conducting positive equity races and build resources a. Build equity from race to race b. Scott Brown spent approximately $30 million dollars. Yet what do we have to show for it? 4. Focus resources on specific seats. a. Down ballot races that increase ballot access and exposure 5. Recruit and run candidates in the major urban areas of Boston, Lowell, New Bedford, Worcester, Springfield, Somerville, Cambridge. a. Recruit and Support Minority candidates, campaigns and causes 6. Focus on getting a ballot question approved a. Take important issues directly to voters 7. Accentuate points in platform that appeal to urban voters a. Conservation/environmental/green initiatives 8. Embrace all party factions and welcome them into the new Big Boat a. Take the best attributes from all corners of our party b. STOP having the knife fight in the life boat 9. Conduct ourselves in an entirely positive manner a. Exude practicality and thrift during these tough economic times b. No negative attacks 10. Recruit and maintain quality campaign operatives that understand old school campaigning yet embrace new technologies a. Door-knocking must be the key to winning races b. Computer technology can serve as force multiplier and help level the playing field

The NewMass Playbook Keys to the NewMass Playbook The New Mass Playbook sets a foundation with three main ideas; 1) Take stock of our current challenges and opportunities 2) Offer a New Plan of Action 3) Provide data as a resource to GOP activists and operatives The overarching theme for is the concept of Equity. Equity, both in terms of fairness and in terms of building collective ownership in our party and, as an extension, our candidates and campaigns.

Page 5 of 14

New Mass Playbook believes that the role of the Mass GOP should be to support all GOP candidates that meet the corresponding Support & Qualification Criteria. Further, this support is only meant to supplement a candidate and campaign. The MassGOP needs a new playbook. For years, Republicans have not been able to build a winning team of activists and campaign operatives and, as a result, have lost equity by investing in too many candidates and campaigns that run, then lose and are never heard from again. Conversely, the Democrats have been able to breed and maintain a consistent group of political operatives and people who seek public office, which has contributed to their overall statewide dominance. For the sake of forming a loyal opposition, the Mass. GOP must reconsider the manner with which we are supporting statewide candidates and their campaigns. We must come up with a plan for allocating resources on a more equitable basis - that spreads the wealth beyond one race. The all or nothing approach has not worked and the GOP is a U.S. Senator away from being completely irrelevant in Massachusetts politics. Lets keep the strategies simple and acknowledge that some of the new GOP practices may have to challenge conventional wisdom. For instance, the GOP should try to compete everywhere, even in urban areas that are viewed as Democrat strongholds. Further, Republicans need to regain the trust of social conservatives, while uniting all corners of the party so that our legions can present a unified front in the name of smaller government, self-reliance and small business. In addition, the GOP should change their campaign teams up a bit and provide opportunities to other operatives who are willing and able to follow the new playbook. If Republicans are going to succeed going forward then we must be willing to change the way that we have been operating and embrace a New Era of Cooperation. The new playbook requires that all Republicans unite and rally together, as a team, to be victorious in November. We are Republican activists that are seeking to improve our party by forming a "loyal opposition" to one party rule. Now, we are endeavoring to develop new ways to elect Republican candidates in Massachusetts and to serve as a resource by providing information, analysis and support for GOP activists, candidates and campaigns. If you are a Republican activist seeking to improve our party by forming a "loyal opposition" then please Join Us in our efforts to restore viable twoparty government to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Our emphasis is about winning more races, not about exalting or criticizing specific candidates, campaigns or personalities. The NewMass Playbook is a data driven exercise based in transparency and accountability for the collective betterment of all Massachusetts Republicans. We want to Discuss the challenges and opportunities that our state party is facing. Certainly, we must understand and address the challenges our candidates encounter in the urban areas of the state. Then, we can begin to Plan how we can move forward. This comes complete with an established and detailed set of criteria that is open and accessible to all candidates and their campaigns. Once we can get consensus about the New Plan we can then field candidates that will Run with a new playbook that addresses many of our current challenges. We believe that candidates that follow the NewMass Playbook will be in better position to Win. Discuss
Page 6 of 14

Some important Questions to Consider. Why are we unable to win statewide? What policies and procedures are in effect that direct our candidates and campaigns? How are our resources allocated? Why do we lose urban areas by such large margins? Who can we try and appeal to? How many cities and towns should we expect to win? This proposal outlines a variety of challenges and opportunities currently facing the Massachusetts Republican Party. Further, it provides a plan for success moving forward. Although the thrust of this memo involves statewide campaigns, many of the points raised apply to the overall operation of the MassGOP as a whole. We will use the most recent 20-year period as examples.

Executive Summary Obviously, recent results of Republican statewide candidates have been poor. However, let us remember that Republican candidates have been able to achieve statewide success, both recently with the triumphant election of Senator Brown and historically with the elections of Governors Weld, Cellucci and Romney. On occasion Massachusetts voters have shown that they will vote for our candidates. Yet, why is our recent record of statewide candidates so abysmal? The New Mass Playbook outlines many of the challenges we collectively face as a party as well as layout a plan for future success. We will address both our challenges and opportunities in a manner that is both deliberative and based upon tangible data. Too often are our arguments being shaped by rhetoric using anecdotal evidence; I assert that we must make choices based upon proven results and real statistics.

Our Three Major Challenges We must address and endeavor to solve for our Urban Problem, find a way to deal with our perpetual Political Operative Brain Drain and work to develop a Comprehensive Plan for success. Challenge #1 The Mass. GOP and Our Urban Problem A look at the election results shows that by far the biggest problem facing the Mass. GOP and our candidates is the fact that we are getting completely overwhelmed in the major urban areas of the state. First off, as a disclaimer, I have no grand illusion that Republican candidates are going to win these urban areas. However, the data reveals that we cannot keep being pummeled by 80%-20% splits in major cities if we hope to win statewide. For example, we simply cannot expect to win a statewide election and lose the City of Boston by over 76,000 votes, as was the case with nearly all of our statewide candidates this past election. A look at the results from the top 20 turnout communities in the Commonwealth is staggering.

Page 7 of 14

Rank in Turnout Gov Race 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 10 11 13 14 16 19 20 41 44 50

Worst GOP Communities Based on Total Turnout 2010 Cycle Governor Boston Worcester Newton Cambridge Springfield Quincy Somerville Brockton Lowell New Bedford Lynn Brookline Arlington Medford Fall River Lawrence Pittsfield Northampton Treasurer Boston Auditor Boston Worcester Newton Cambridge Springfield Secretary Boston Worcester Newton Cambridge Springfield Quincy Somerville Brockton Lowell New Bedford Lynn Brookline Arlington Medford Fall River Lawrence Attorney Gen. Boston Worcester Newton Cambridge Springfield Quincy Somerville Brockton Lowell New Bedford Lynn Brookline Arlington Medford Fall River Lawrence Pittsfield Northampton

Newton Cambridge Springfield Quincy Somerville Somerville Brockton Brockton Lowell Lowell New Bedford New Bedford Lynn Lynn Brookline Brookline Arlington Arlington Medford Medford Fall River Fall River Lawrence Lawrence Pittsfield Pittsfield Northampton Northampton Northampton Worst is defined as actual vote deficit

Take the 2010 Gubernatorial cycle as an example. In fact, all of our statewide candidates lost the top five highest voting communities in the Commonwealth. Charlie Baker was only able to win four out of the top 20 turnout communities, Plymouth, Weymouth, Peabody and Barnstable and none of those are in the top 10 turnout communities. Charlie Baker lost the top 20 communities by a combined 229,886 votes. Yet his total statewide differential was only 145,357 votes. Therefore, it is reasonable to speculate: had Baker only done half as bad in those communities then he would have been within 30,000 votes of victory. All of our statewide candidates shared losing 13 out of the top 20 communities with the highest turnout. Conversely, none of our statewide candidates shared winning any of the best GOP communities. Thus, there are many cities and towns where our candidates are across the board sharing negative results, yet there are no communities where we are across the board sharing positive results. There were only nine communities where Baker received over 60% of the vote, with the largest being the Town of Lynnfield. In opposition, Governor Patrick had 70 communities where he received over 60% of the vote. It is important to note that he also received over 80% of the vote in three places, which included the 3rd largest turnout City of Cambridge and 70% of the vote in the City of Boston, which is the highest turnout City in the state. In summary, our candidates, with few exceptions, are consistently losing the urban areas by very large amounts and cannot count on more than a few small communities to serve as their base. We must recognize that the Democrats possess a Built In advantage in numbers, both in terms of voter enrollment and office holders. In fact, Democrats outnumber Republicans 3 to
Page 8 of 14

1 statewide and by even larger numbers throughout these urban areas. According to the Secretary of States Office, as of 10/13/2010, the total amount of Registered Voters is 4,190,907. There are 1,528,974-registered Democrat, 414,798-registered Republican and 2,161,840 registered Unenrolled. The corresponding percentages are 36.5% Democrat, 11.3% Republican and 51.6% Unenrolled. Furthermore, the Democrats have controlled every Constitutional Office since 2006 and many of those office holders are from urban districts. I have compiled an analysis of the Election Day results as they pertain to all of our candidates for Constitutional Offices. See 2010_Constitutional_Officers_Results_2010.xls. We must address this urban challenge with an intense amount of focus for the upcoming reelection bid of Senator Brown and future candidates. This starts with getting back to basics in these urban areas. Making sure that the Ward & City Committees are organized, active and recruiting members, staging party sponsored events and voter registration drives, identifying new voters, enlisting first-time voters as Republicans and using all forms of media to propagate the parts of our party platform that will most likely appeal to these urban voters.

Challenge #2 A Pattern of Political Operative Brain Drain A comparison and contrast of the Massachusetts Republican and Democrat party infrastructure illustrates a significant difference in how our parties have handled their management over election cycles and campaigns. Since the Weld election of 1990, the Mass. GOP has had 11 Chairmen and 15 Executive Directors. Over the same period, the Democrat Party has had four Chairmen and three Executive Directors. Therefore, our party has had over three times the amount of turnover that the Democrats have had. In essence, we have had a new Chairman and Executive Director during nearly every new statewide election cycle since 1990. We have had a virtual revolving door of operatives in and out of the Mass. GOP, with a large number of these individuals leaving to either charge a fee for their services or leaving the political scene altogether. During their time with the Mass. GOP the party both compensated and invested time and/or resources into training and indoctrinating these people. Therefore, when they leave we, as a party, are losing equity in our investment. This brain drain has led to a constant state of training and retraining. We must address this very real management issue. The Democrat party has been able to breed and maintain a consistent group of political operatives, which most likely has in some way contributed to their overall statewide dominance.

Challenge #3 Lack of a Comprehensive Plan for Success Clearly, we are lacking a comprehensive plan for success. In fact, since 1990 there have been 30 elections for Massachusetts Constitutional offices. Yet Mass. GOP candidates have only won four races, with many of those elections going uncontested by viable Republican candidates. We currently have no policies and/or formula that outline specific parameters of how statewide campaigns will be funded, staffed, managed, etc. Although we are the party of small
Page 9 of 14

business, we are not acting as a strong small business would. We do not seem to have a sound business plan of how to cultivate, recruit and support candidates for statewide office. If we do, where is it? Another glaring shortfall is the lack of support and/or resources devoted to local candidates and committees. With the exception of providing them access to VoterVault, what support, if any, has the Mass. GOP provided that has made a positive difference in terms of electing local candidates? We must come up with a plan for allocating our resources on a more equitable basis. Our statewide candidates deserve to share in the support that our supporters expect. Certainly, we can devise a uniform set of policies, procedures and controls so that all of our candidates can have adequate resources available for their campaigns. Our all or nothing approach has not worked well enough to allow this strategy to carry on. Obviously, there are many challenges that are not mentioned here and I am aware that many of these challenges may or may not have tangible impacts on the outcomes of elections. However, we must start to seek out our challenges if we are to rectify them. With challenges comes opportunity. Lets look at a few areas to prospect for future success.

Opportunities There are many areas that we can improve upon and our opportunities include: having a set of ideals and an Honorable Platform that voters will support, we are fortunate enough to have a laudable cache of former GOP officeholders that have the Institutional Knowledge necessary to win campaigns and a Membership that has proven the ability to raise money and support for our candidates.

Opportunity #1 Honorable Platform Filled with honorable ideals that are capable of acceptance by voters across the political spectrum, the Mass. GOP is the party of small business. We should continue to emphasize this and expand upon this base through various Public Outreach Efforts. We should also promote the planks from our platform that appeal directly to urban voters. Take for example our position on the environment. The whole world is going green and we should be tapping into that sentiment. After all, we have allowed liberals to take advantage on environmental issues. This is foolish; particularly when you consider that the very backbone of the environmental movement is based up conservation. Shouldnt the party that claims to be conservative be the group that advances the principles of conservation and self-reliance? These are just two examples of issues that we can be using. Clearly, merely declaring that we want lower taxes and smaller government is not resonating enough here in Massachusetts. Obviously, large amounts of voters do indeed want big government and higher taxes. So lets focus on issues where we can get traction and stop pushing the parts of our platform that are not getting our candidates elected.

Opportunity #2
Page 10 of 14

Institutional Knowledge We possess three out of the last four individuals to be elected Governor. We have a U.S. Senator. Our national Committeeman has served Republican Presidents. We have numerous individuals that are ready, willing and able to serve the party and certainly many of them are already doing so. However, it is apparent that we are lacking a systematic and focused set of policies and procedures that draws upon the vast amount of institutional knowledge that many of our previous office holders possess. Too many of our candidates did not have the skill necessary to perform rudimentary campaign functions such as how to; fundraise, voter id, setup and prepare for debate, establish a direct mail account, develop direct mail pieces, etc. This can be addressed with a few low cost and low-tech solutions. Opportunity #3 Membership Many of our members are the strength of the Massachusetts business community. As the party of small business, we should establish a clear and focused set of policies and procedures to attract and support small business owners, their workers and their customers. Perhaps we could help facilitate a Buy Massachusetts proposal or a legislative initiative aimed specifically as a Small Business Relief package. We should sponsor and promote a series of Initiative Petitions that are directed to our core constituencies. This election cycle we allowed the Libertarian Carla Howell to put forth the sales tax rollback to 3%. This was a mistake. We should have controlled the dialogue with a proposal that our candidates could have rallied behind 100%. Instead, many of our candidates had to muddy their position on the tax questions by saying they would not vote to reduce the tax because it was too drastic. This was completely the wrong narrative and, more importantly, was out of our control because we did not sponsor the initiative. We should control the debate on these small business issues. Having worked on the original 1998 Income tax Rollback, I distinctly remember having that ballot question serve as a welcomed backdrop to Celluccis message of streamlining government. The key with all of these propositions is finding the issues that will appeal to urban voters of all political persuasions. Good ideas know no political party. To be successful we must identify and spread messages that appeal to all voters.

Conclusion The results of recent elections is clear. As a party, we must develop and institute better strategies for attracting urban voters, minority voters and increase our Republican voter enrollment totals. Even though Baker won 50 more communities than Governor Patrick, the losses in these urban areas make it much too difficult to overcome statewide. We have to improve our results in urban areas. We must look to the long-term when it comes time to selecting Chairman and Executive Directors and develop continuity throughout our staff. We have great institutional knowledge, but it is only helpful if we are able to harness it and use it in a focused and purposeful manner.

Page 11 of 14

We should adopt sets of criteria, such as this, complete with funding formulas that designate how we will approach, manage and fund particular races. Finally, we must do a better job of developing and instituting tangible plans and a uniform set of specific campaign polices and procedures. That is why I have developed the following manner with which to deem viability and allocate resources to our candidates, campaigns and party.

Plan Under the NewMassPlaybook plan, candidates and campaigns that meet the corresponding Support and Qualification criteria would share in the resources to run. Candidates and their campaigns will have a defined set of criteria that will guide them through the process for gaining support, both from the party and through organized campaigning. This is a sample criteria that would be used to allocate support for candidates and campaigns. Now, viability will not be objective, it will be explicitly detailed through a predetermined set of criteria. This establishes three separate stages; the Ballot Qualification Stage, the Post Primary Stage and the Challenge Stage. Candidates will have to complete each of the various steps. This 10 step approach can be refined to better reflect the viability of each criteria for specific offices. New Mass Playbook Support & Qualification Criteria See Table Below Candidates will now be able to know exactly what their campaigns must do in order to qualify for support. Candidate Support Formula See Table Below Now candidates will have some reasonable explanation as to why and how they will be provided support. The table to the right is based upon $2,100,000 worth of funding and having every seat being contested. Click here for the Excel spreadsheet with widget. So, if more money is raised then the values would increase by that corresponding percentage. Likewise, if less than every seat is being contested then the values would increase by the corresponding percentage. Using this support formula during last election cycle would have meant that a statewide candidate could have received $52,500 in funding if they met all of the criteria for support. Please recognize that we are endeavoring to elect Republican candidates. However, this site is in no way affiliated with the Massachusetts Republican State Committee.

Page 12 of 14

New Mass Playbook Candidate Qualification & Viability Criteria

Candidates will now be able to know exactly what their campaigns must do in order to qualify for funding. Ballot Stage (BQS) 15% of funding January August 1) Initial Background check - No felony convictions, up to date taxes, No effigy on lawn etc. = 3% 2) Affirmation of Mass. GOP Pledge - Buy into Party Platform, Smaller government, Lower Taxes, = 3% 3) Amount of Signatures (Sig) gathered Must be certified by City Clerk, = 3% 4) Committee and accounts established properly Understands implications of campaign finance = 3% 5) Artwork and peripherals signed off on Understands efficient and professional presentation = 3% Post Primary Stage (PPS) 40 % of funding September 15th October 15th 6) Amount of individual Donors (Don) Actual number of individuals that have contributed = 20% 7) Amount of money raised to date The actual amount of money raised by a certain date = 20% Challenge Stage (CS) 45% of funding October 15th Election 8) Pieces of Direct Mail (DM) sent Actual amount of pieces sent as verified by postal report = 15% 9) Aggregate amount of Money raised (Agg. Mon.) - The total amount raised during campaign = 15% 10) Allowable efficiency factor Campaign is operated efficiently = 15% Stages BQS PPS CS CS Constitutional Offices Amt. of Sig. Amt. of Don. Amt. of DM. Agg. Mon.. Governor 20,000 5,000 1,500,000 $4,000,000 Lieutenant Governor 20,000 5,000 750,000 $2,000,000 Governors Council 2,000 1,500 200,000 $50,000 Treasurer 10,000 5,000 1,500,000 $2,000,000 Auditor 10,000 5,000 1,500,000 $1,000,000 Secretary of State 10,000 5,000 1,500,000 $1,000,000 Attorney General 20,000 5,000 1,500,000 $2,000,000 Congressional U.S. Senator Congress County Sheriff Register of Probate Register of Deeds Clerk of Courts County Commissioner County Treasurer District Attorney Legislative House Senate Amt. of Sig. 20,000 4,000 Amt. of Sig. 3,500 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 Amt. of Sig. 300 800 Amt. of Don. 5,000 2,000 Amt. of Don. 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,500 Amt. of Don. 300 750 Amt. of DM. 1,500,000 350,000 Amt. of DM. 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 Amt. of DM. 40,000 160,000 Agg. Mon.. $4,000,000 $600,000 Agg. Mon.. $500,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 Agg. Mon.. $50,000 $150,000

After this step is complete candidates will proceed onto Run and the Candidate Support Formula will determine the level of support that they can expect based upon the above Qualifications and Viability Criteria.

Page 13 of 14

New Mass Playbook Candidate Support Formula

Elected Offices Constitutional Governor Lieutenant Governor Subtotal Treasurer Auditor Secretary of State Attorney General Subtotal Congressional Subtotal County Sheriff County Commissioner District Attorney Subtotal Legislative House Senate Subtotal Total Seats Contested Pool Total % of Actual Total Pool Per Amount Per Amount Per Seat Seat Office 80.000% 20.000% $1,008,000 $252,000 $1,008,000 $252,000 $1,260,000 25.000% 25.000% 25.000% 25.000% $52,500 $52,500 $52,500 $52,500 $52,500 $52,500 $52,500 $52,500 $210,000 10% 10.000% $10,000 $100,000 $210,000

1 1 2 1 1 1 1 4 9 9



7 2 2 11


9.091% 9.091% 9.091%

$19,091 $19,091 $19,091

$133,636 $38,182 $38,182 $210,000

82 29 111 142


0.505% 2.020%

$1,061 $4.242

$86,970 $123,030 $210,000



We are leading the discussion and trying to spur meaningful reforms. Further, we want to help the Mass. GOP be more effective and that includes all of our officials, candidates and activists. We want to Win campaigns and believe that these criteria are an important step forward towards victories in November.

Page 14 of 14