This Republican National Committee statement condemning Obama for not declaring an executive amnesty for unauthorized immigrants is a classic Michael Kinsley gaffe. It revealed that the RNC wanted both the amnesty and the chance to blame Obama for the amnesty.

This isn’t the first such incident for the Reince Priebus-run RNC. The 2013 RNC autopsy noted that it wasn’t the job of the Republican National Committee to offer policy advice to the party – and then proceeded to argue that the Republicans need to embrace “comprehensive immigration reform”. That is a Washington euphemism for expanded low-skill guest worker programs, and legalization of the existing unauthorized population, while putting off internal enforcement until… forever if they can swing it.

The difference between the autopsy and the statement on President Obama’s threatened amnesty was that the RNC was able to dress up the autopsy as concern trolling. The lobbyists at the RNC were ever so concerned that the GOP seemed indifferent on immigration. For some reason, it didn’t seem to bother the RNC nearly as much that the GOP seemed indifferent about the payroll tax burden on working families or availability of health insurance. Oh, I forgot. Reince Priebus doesn’t do policy.

Ever since the 2012 election, the Priebus-run RNC has chosen not to act as a mediator between the party’s factions on immigration policy. It has chosen to act as an agent of that faction within the Republican party that wants to expand future low-skill immigration even though our current population of low-skill workers (both native and foreign-born) are experiencing high unemployment and low rates of labor force participation.

One of our super-commenters DJF wondered if maybe we are stuck with our current situation. I’m not so sure. On the one hand, the Republican party would benefit from new RNC leadership that displayed more respect for the differences of opinion within the party on immigration policy. On the other hand, the RNC does seem to know that it has to tread lightly. It had to present its immigration agenda in terms of electoral prudence rather than policy preference (or fat lobbying fees). They were using the Peter Venkman defense, “Back off man, I’m a scientist.”

The key is not to give the RNC any benefit of the doubt when it oversteps its bounds. Conservative activists and politicians should be ready to call out Priebus as a divider who is damaging the party in order to aid one of the party’s factions. My suspicion is the we will learn that the RNC is quite sensitive to high-profile criticism. Priebus can have deference again when he earns it by staying within the bounds of being a service-provider for the party, rather than acting as a division manager for Lobby Inc.