DNC Chair Ken Martin Under Fire — Former RNC Chair Michael Steele Says Criticism Is Premature

It’s a difficult moment to lead the Democratic National Committee. With fewer than 100 days before the midterm elections, DNC Chair Ken Martin is confronting the fallout from a damaging New York Times investigation that described the committee as "troubled, broke" and reported roughly $2 million in debt compared with the Republican National Committee’s much larger war chest.

The Times article, based on interviews with more than two dozen Democrats, relayed harsh claims: that the DNC asked vendors to delay invoicing until after the election to mask liabilities, that Martin allegedly hurled a phone at a junior staffer, and that employees report working in fear of leaks.

I am not a Democrat, but I empathize with Martin. When I chaired the Republican National Committee during the 2010 midterms, I endured similar public blowback from critics who declared the party — and I — were doomed.

Conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh urged me to "go behind the scenes," saying many conservatives wanted "nothing to do" with the RNC under my leadership. Representative Tom Cole demanded I "apologize and resign" after I questioned the war in Afghanistan. Major donors publicly signaled they would withhold contributions while I was in charge. The Washington Post ran a piece that framed me as an "albatross for the GOP." Given all that, you might have expected a catastrophic defeat — but the opposite occurred.

That cycle the RNC raised $164 million despite not having a sitting president on the fundraising trail. Republicans gained 63 House seats — the largest swing in more than seven decades. We added six Senate seats, won six governorships, and recorded historic gains in state legislatures. I won’t claim those victories were solely my doing, but I know we built the organizational infrastructure that made broad electoral success possible — more than the naysayers predicted.

Why Context Matters

Some of Martin’s critics risk making the same mistake: mistaking noisy criticism for clear evidence of failure. National party chairs have two core responsibilities: raise funds and help win elections. The tactics to achieve those goals are complex, and the job often involves difficult trade-offs and long-term investments that don’t make for tidy headlines.

"Being bad at self-promotion isn't the same as being ineffective," Steele writes, noting that public image and operational effectiveness are not identical measures.

While the RNC retains a sizable fundraising advantage, the DNC has provided context that should reassure Democrats: the committee says it has raised more money than any prior DNC operating without the White House, and it reports providing regular monthly support to state parties across the country. Even if the national committee is not the primary funder of individual campaigns — that role typically falls to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) — the DNC is investing in campaign infrastructure and sustained voter outreach designed to help candidates win.

Strategically, Martin emphasizes maintaining an ongoing Democratic presence on the ground rather than waiting until the final days before ballots are cast. That approach focuses on long-term organizing, voter contact, and building local capacity — investments whose payoff will be clearer in election results than in off-the-record complaints.

The final judgment on Martin’s performance will come in November. It will be measured by the number of Democratic victories the DNC helps deliver — not by leaks, anonymous quotes, or sensational headlines. Until then, Democrats should concentrate on priorities and execution. As I told my critics in 2010: "If you don't want me in the job, fire me. But until then, shut up. Get with the program or get out of the way."

For further commentary, watch "The Weeknight" with Michael Steele, Symone Sanders Townsend and Luke Russert every Monday–Friday at 7 p.m. ET on MS NOW.