The new regime will benefit top candidates who don’t need free media exposure. RNC clamps down on '16 debates

MEMPHIS, Tenn. — Virtually every Republican leader agrees that the 20 GOP debates in the last presidential primary season damaged Mitt Romney — remember “self-deportation”? – and briefly made front-runners out of eventual flameouts like Herman Cain and Newt Gingrich.

Party leaders vowed never to let it happen again. On Thursday, they took action, moving at a Republican National Committee meeting here to dramatically cut the number of GOP primary debates — possibly in half.


A group of 13 RNC members, essentially operating under the control of party Chairman Reince Priebus, will choose the timing, location and media partners of the 2015-2016 Republican primary debates. They will insist that conservative panelists join moderators from the mainstream media.

( Also on POLITICO: Son: Jeb Bush raising in 'key' states)

To make it stick, the plan would crack down on candidates who participate in debates that aren’t sanctioned by the party — by barring them from ones that are.

The biggest surprise about the overhaul is how little resistance it met. The new regime will benefit top-tier candidates who don’t need the free media exposure, as well as broadcast networks that spend big money to produce debates and don’t want to put on more than a few of them. The losers are underdog candidates and cable channels, which draw bigger-than-usual audiences on debate nights. It will also mean fewer sponsorship opportunities for non-TV media properties.

The likely result of Thursday’s move: About half as many debates as in 2012 and, potentially, friendlier questions.

“Any speech you give nowadays to the grass roots, there’s no bigger applause line than when you say, ‘This time around, we’re going to have something to say about the moderators and debate partners,’” Priebus said in an interview. “People go wild!”

“They want good moderators that aren’t in the business of playing gotcha, and it’s our responsibility to become the custodian of the nomination process,” he added. “The last couple cycles, the RNC forgot about their responsibility of being the custodian of the nomination process.”

( Also on POLITICO: Reid: Media covering for Republicans)

Though the loss of free media exposure could hurt dark-horse candidates — think Rick Santorum, Ben Carson or Peter King — Priebus said campaigns-in-waiting do not view the changes as aimed at working to any one’s advantage.

“Privately, I’ve spoken to more than a few of the potential candidates,” he said, “and overwhelmingly they support this. Not even overwhelmingly — unanimously.”

Georgia commiteeman Randy Evans, who was a senior adviser to Newt Gingrich’s presidential campaign, attributed Gingrich’s win in South Carolina and loss in Florida to good, and then bad, debate performances. But he supported the measure as a compromise. He said the ban on participating in sanctioned debates was not as stringent as some others had hoped for. At one point, for example, Priebus floated stripping delegates from candidates who went to non-allowed debates.

“This is the product that made the most sense at the end of the day,” said Evans.

Though the plan has overwhelming support among RNC members, there were some dissenters.

( Also on POLITICO: Republicans hit IRS’ Lois Lerner with contempt)

“I don’t think punishment is the way to go,” Nevada committeewoman Diana Orrock said. “As a voter, I want to see candidates in all possible venues. I want to see the good, the bad and the ugly.”

Priebus has also worked to get buy-in from the potential media partners. In recent months, he has met with political directors and bureau chiefs at the major networks — ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN and Fox News — to air their thoughts and get a read on the networks’ thinking.

“It’s essentially a listening tour, they’re sharing their general ideas,” said Chuck Todd, NBC News political director and senior White House correspondent. “It was a very open, good conversation. They heard us out, we heard them out.”

Because of last cycle’s circus-like atmosphere, and because of suspicions of liberal bias, some Republican constituents would like to ice out mainstream media journalists altogether.

“The people running the debates need to be Republicans,” said Georgia GOP Chairman John Padgett.

Frustration with the moderators from the 2012 election cycle — George Stephanopoulos and Candy Crowley are two frequently cited boogeymen — is a big reason why. ABC’s Stephanopoulos irked the candidates in January 2012 when he asked questions about contraception. CNN’s Crowley interrupted Romney during his second general election debate with Barack Obama to tell him he was incorrect in a statement about the attacks on the U.S. Embassy in Benghazi.

RNC officials insist they are not looking to cut out the mainstream media. Debates are expensive to produce and require skilled producers and talent. The RNC also wants to reach a broader audience, not cordon itself off in an echo chamber.

“They’ve got their own politics to deal with on this,” one network source said. “Reince and [communications director Sean] Spicer are not going to get caught up in the stupid game. They need professional news organizations.”

Instead, the RNC is hoping to get the networks to agree to add conservative voices to its panel of moderators. That might mean seeing conservative journalists like Rich Lowry or Bill Kristol sitting alongside the Diane Sawyers and John Kings. Most political directors and bureau chiefs who spoke with POLITICO said they’d be fine with that plan — to a point.

“Would I be comfortable doing a debate with the Weekly Standard or the National Review? Sure,” one network source said. “Would I be comfortable doing a debate with Breitbart? Probably not.”

People who are sitting in on these meetings say Priebus’ bigger concern than moderators has seemed to be ensuring that there are fewer debates. One attendee pegged the expected number under the plan at “six to 10.”

Broadcast networks seem content with that plan, as it would give each channel one or two events. Given their large prime-time audiences, the debates can sometimes mean a decline in the ratings. ABC’s “Modern Family” averages around 8 million viewers; ABC’s best debate in the 2012 cycle drew 7.63 million.

“For the networks, we’re not going to want seven or eight debates,” one political director said. “We don’t have the place to put them.”

CNN and Fox News, which together hosted 12 of the 20 debates last cycle, are less enthusiastic. Debates were a ratings boon for both channels in 2012, and an opportunity to showcase talent. But it was the cable networks that contributed most to the sense of primary debates as Wrestlemania.

CNN’s elaborate, doom-laden introduction videos came in for heavy criticism. Fox News forcing the candidates to raise their hands if they’d agree to a $1 tax increase if it meant $10 in spending cuts also bothered a lot of people on the right.

“I’m not interested in accommodating the interests or needs of network television,” said Colorado GOP Chairman Ryan Call. “I want a thoughtful conversation, not an opportunity for folks auditioning for their next gig on Fox News.”

Thought the party is moving deliberately to enact the plan, conflict over details is seen as likely. There’s no legal definition for what a “debate” is; party officials say that the newly formed debate committee will decide. What happens, for example, if a handful of candidates show up at a “forum” or sit down for a “joint interview”?

Ultimately, if the networks and big-name candidates feel the debate committee’s demands are too onerous, both could, in theory, bypass them.

“Campaigns are always going to look out for campaigns’ interest,” said Henry Barbour, a Mississippi committeeman. “They’re the ones who are driving the car. We just sort of get to say, you can drive 55 miles an hour, you’ve got to stay on this road, you’re not supposed to be in the ditch, and if you don’t, you may get pulled over by a trooper with an RNC hat on. Or you can just outrun him.”

Political directors and bureau chiefs also stressed that, after the early primaries, the RNC won’t really have control over the debate process.

“There’s the period that goes until Super Tuesday, and then there’s overtime,” one political director said, noting that Obama and Hillary Clinton attended two one-on-one debates in April 2008.

“Essentially, they can control the debates until the primaries begin, then they have to get out of it,” he said. “It’s beyond their control.”

Those who helped craft Thursday’s rule change, which will be formally ratified on Friday by the party’s 168-member governing body, predict that it will stick.

“Last time, we didn’t have the stick,” said Oregon committeeman Solomon Yue. “That will be a very effective deterrent.”