Before the June primaries, I pointed out that party unity could end up being a key factor in determining how well each party does in Maine’s elections in November.

Since then, both parties seem to have done relatively well in that regard: They’ve successfully moved beyond the primaries and largely united behind their respective gubernatorial nominees – an easier task without any serious unenrolled candidates contesting in the fall.

Sure, there’s been some signs of grumbling in both parties, but largely it’s been at the local level and stayed mostly, if not entirely, behind the scenes. Both parties seem to have come to an unspoken agreement to lay aside their internal differences until after the election.

Well, so much for that.

It’s no surprise that the first sign of an internal schism comes from legislative Republicans. Recently, it has become apparent that one PAC is far, far ahead of the others on the House side (at least, for now), a group called the Dinner Table PAC. That’s not so unusual: With current House Republican Leader Kathleen Dillingham unable to run again due to term limits, there was bound to be a very competitive race for leadership.

What is unusual here is not only that the Dinner Table PAC is finding success despite not being affiliated with the current leadership, but that the group has used criticism of current leadership as part of its fundraising appeal, and focused on small donors.

It’s not unusual for candidates to base a run for leadership on criticism of current leadership. That’s par for the course.

If most legislators are tired of the current regime, sometimes that strategy is quite successful. Sometimes it’s a spectacular failure. What’s unusual about this situation is that the entire episode has become public, and that it’s happening so far in advance of the election.

For the most part, legislative leadership races in Maine are quiet, behind-the-scenes affairs: The general public hardly pays any attention to them and only learns the results once they occur.

While leadership candidates frequently raise and spend money on behalf of legislative candidates, normally it’s only the legislators themselves who are cognizant of which candidates are raising and spending the most. All of this usually happens at the legislative party caucuses after the elections, and usually those results play into that decision. Often, if a party loses the majority or doesn’t do as well as expected, a change in leadership is all but inevitable – it’s part of the responsibility that comes with the job.

At least, it used to be. Lately that model has been turned on its head in both parties, as legislative leaders have often kept their jobs despite losing seats. This doesn’t make sense. It’s political malpractice to give the people who lost the last election the chance to lose yet another one.

It would appear, based on the fracas between the Dinner Table PAC and current House leadership, that a faction of House Republicans are beginning to feel the same way, that holding leadership to account is a good thing.

It’s also good to see another source of funding emerge. Too often, legislative leaders can use their ability to fundraise to sway the votes of their caucus toward special interests. By relying more on small donors, the Dinner Table turns that model on its head (at least, a bit) by giving the grassroots more of a say, if an indirect one, in leadership races. It’s an interesting model that could upend Maine politics in the future.

What’s unfortunate is that this entire episode has become public. While most voters likely won’t know or care about it, it shows that Republican legislators aren’t forming a united front. It would be a shame if these internal divisions hobble the party so much that it becomes unable to take advantage of a favorable political environment. Hopefully, both factions can take a step back and realize that before it’s too late.

Jim Fossel, a conservative activist from Gardiner, worked for Sen. Susan Collins. He can be contacted at:
jwfossel@gmail.com
Twitter: @jimfossel