Dear leaders of the American Reform Party,

     In conjunction with the enclosed suggestions with regard to our
 congressional strategy, the CSSC suggests that the ARP take the
 following actions:

     1)  Create an outreach program to big names potentially sympathetic to
 the ARP.  Those names should include Bill Weld, Linda Smith, John Anderson,
 David Boren, John Danforth, Mark Hatfield, Nancy Kassebaum, Angus King, Sam
 Nunn, Tim Penny, Warren Rudman, Paul Simon, Al Simpson, Lowell Weicker, Dick
 Lamm, and Ed Zschau.  We suggest Dick Lamm, Ed Zschau and, perhaps, Tim
 Penny be approached about their willingness to help us with this
 outreach.

     2)  Direct the Platform Committee to formulate a list of ARP issues requirements
 in order to endorse candidates and a procedure for enforcement of those requirements.

     3)  Form a registered multi-candidate committee with the FEC. (Recently approved by the ARP National Committee, and in the process of being formed)

     4)  Authorize candidate search committees in each potential Senate seat
 and District targeted by ARP.

     5)  Endorse Chester Gillings as ARP's candidate in Colorado's 5th CD.  (Recently approved by the ARP National Committee)

     6)  Create an outreach program to the media.

     7)  Approve the sending of the enclosed suggested letter to Sam Rankin,
 urging his entrance into Montana's Senate sweepstakes.  (Recently approved by the ARP National Committee, and sent to Mr. Rankin)

     8)  Recommend that the Platform Committee formulate a questionnaire
 which ARP would send to potential endorsees and candidates by which to gauge
 the level of their support of ARP issue positions.  (Recently approved by the ARP National Committee, and currently being formulated)

    The above represents what the CSSC believes to be the top priority actions that need to be taken by the ARP as we prepare for the upcoming millenial campaign.  In addition, I shall maintain a page containing suggested updates which, in the opinion of the CSSC, should be incorporated into the strategy.  I shall NOT incorporate such suggested changes into the strategy itself, since, at that point, the strategy will be in a state of consideration by the EC and/or NC and therefore temporarily outside of the jurisdiction of the CSSC.  At such time as the EC and/or NC may choose, in its wisdom, to approve the proposed strategy, it is my hope that the EC and/or NC also shall give carte blanche to the CSSC to make changes as it sees fit over the coming two-year political season, subject only to veto by the leadership bodies of the ARP, like the EC, the NC, and the national convention.

     Sincerely yours,

     The Congressional Strategy Special Committee of the American Reform
 Party
 

    I believe the best long-term path for us to pursue strategically is the creation of a swing coalition over the next six years within the US Congress composed partially of ARP representatives and Senators and partially of Republicrats who are sympathetic to ARP goals, to which I shall apply the term 'Trojan horses.'  Our goal should NOT be to win either house of Congress outright; that would be unrealistic and a waste of our time and energies.  Furthermore, when the CSSC last met, on May 30, we conclude that it would not serve any useful purpose for us to focus on the 2000 presidential election.  If someone is interested in running on our banner as a presidential candidate that is fine, provided the candidate is sober and respectable but, unless that someone is well known and has a high degree of credibility, the 2000 presidential race should not be our primary focus.  Rather our presidential focus should be on 2004 with the afore-mentioned creation of a congressional coalition functioning as a crucial element of that campaign.  Remember too that the creation of a congressional coalition can not only be brought about by electoral victories but also by strong showings which cost the winning candidate a 50+% majority of the vote.  There is nothing like a swing group in the electorate who is effective in its turnout to get a politician's attention.

    While this conclusion remains the official conclusion of the ARP CSSC, the fact remains that this issue probably needs revisiting in light of the recent news that former Connecticut Governor Lowell Weicker is seriously considering throwing his hat into the 2000 presidential ring.

    In further aid of my operating principle that our strategy be narrowly focused, I propose that we create contacts and help to organize less than half of the states within this country. I have selected states where the vote for Perot in 92 and 96 was above the national average percentage.  Just to remind you, Perot's vote in 92 was 19% and his vote in 96 was 8%.  Using that as our criterion, I have chosen to focus on the following 25 states:

Alaska,         California,         Connecticut,             Colorado, Delaware,         Florida,         Hawaii,             Idaho,    Maine,     Massachusetts,   Minnesota,  Montana,  Nevada,  New Hampshire,    New Jersey,   North Dakota, Ohio,  Oregon, Rhode Island,          Utah,         Vermont,              Washington,   West Virginia,    Wisconsin, and Wyoming.

    The Congressional Special Committee has concluded that there are a total of 10 races which should be our party's highest priority as we seek to make inroads in our national houses of Congress. (Click here to open a new window with that Top Ten list.)

    To summarize my results, the top priority Senators who are vulnerable, and where there is also a challenger who seems a logical choice for us to support, are Montana Senator Conrad Burns, New Hampshire Senator Bob Smith, Minnesota Senator Rod Grams, and Washington Senator Slade Gorton.  (Click here to view a table of our Senate prospects in a new window.  You may leave that window open as a reference as you read through this proposal.)

    Where the House is concerned, there are 18 House seats which appear vulnerable and where we appear to have viable candidates available whom we could support. Of those there are six seats which we believe deserve to be given the highest priority by ARP.  (Click here to view a table of our House prospects in a new window.  You may leave that window open as a reference as you read through this proposal.)

    In order to make this strategy work, we must not only have a clear picture of where our strengths lie and where we are in a position to take advantage of those strengths.  We must also be thinking about ways of galvanizing public interest in our efforts.  Without a popular groundswell brought about by favorable news coverage congenial local turf will be insufficient, I feel, to ignite the prairie fire we need to see in order for us to create this legislative and political coalition over the next six years.  I suggest, therefore, that we create this summer or fall, either before or after our convention, preferably before, a Public Relations Team consisting of high-credibility high-profile leaders who would commit to helping us make this coalition a reality. Click here for that aspect of the strategy.

    Now let us deal with our target states in turn in alphabetical order.  If I do not list a congressional district within a given state it will be because I feel there is both an unsympathetic incumbent there and weak support for our issues and/or third-party/independent candidates there, both sufficient causes for us to give that race a pass.