Independence Party Looks to the Future

Rallying around 2006 gubernatorial candidate Peter Hutchinson’s exhortation that “the campaign’s not over,” the Independence party’s central committee worked Sunday to chart their course for the next two years.

Hutchinson’s speech, delivered after extensive discussion on possible restructuring of the party, emphasized that despite his only polling 6% in November, his ideas were getting across.

“Senator Tom Rukavina called me up to testify before his committee on higher education.  He said, ‘You had some good ideas about higher education, and you got 140,000 votes, and you deserve to be heard.  Oh, and by the way, I hate your guts,’” said Hutchinson, jovially.  “When I was done, he said to me, ‘Well, I still hate your guts, but you have a lot of good ideas.’”

After the morning session, the central committee broke out into smaller groups, discussing how to attract more money for the party, how to increase grassroots involvement, what the party’s agenda should be, and how the party should be branded.  A few members suggested changing the name of the party, which had been known as the Reform party until it broke with the national Reform party in 2000.

Peter Tharaldson, the chair of the fifth congressional district, said that the party was looking internationally for possible tactical shifts.

“We’ve talked to the Liberal Democrats, they’re the third party in the U.K.,” he said.  “They said they target districts where one party or the other has an overwhelming advantage.  That paid dividends for us in the fifth, where we’re close to being the second party.”

As for the future of the party, chair Jim Moore was upbeat.

“We’re stronger than ever,” he said in a brief interview after the meeting.  “The quality of our candidates is improving.  I think people knew last year that our gubernatorial candidate was the best of the three.  We just need to find a way to tell our story.”

Moore was emphatic that he didn’t want his party to be seen as just a moderate alternative.  “We’re still the party of personal responsibility and fiscal responsibility, he said.  “I don’t want to be the ‘not them’ party.”