The recent decision by the Pennsylvania Republican State Committee to endorse a candidate for U.S. Senate is another reminder of the chasm between the conservative, grassroots base of the Republican Party and elitist "establishment" Republicans.

 

For conservatives and political reformers, the recent endorsement of former Democrat booster and Barack Obama supporter Steve Welch smacks of political hijinks worthy of the era of Boss Tweed - and raises a plethora of bothersome questions.

 

Since the emergence of the tea party movement and the reassertion of the political reformers within the GOP, a growing opposition to party leadership dictating candidates and positions to Republican voters has become increasingly vocal. Party bosses were more than aware of the disdain held for traditional bullying tactics, so why was the committee bent on endorsement?

 

With more than 40 percent of the state committee opposed to an endorsement vote, it is apparent that a shrinking but stubborn cadre of ringmasters wanted to reassert authority. Was it merely to intimidate reformers and reassert their own relevance, or did they want to neutralize the influence of the reform-minded?

 

Perhaps more reprehensible is the fact that the case against endorsing Welch against Bob Casey was three-fold: he had voted for uber-liberal Obama and hosted a "meet-and-greet" for liberal Democrat and Pat Toomey opponent Joe Sestak, and he has an inconsistent record at even being a registered Republican.