Last week, new RNC chairman Michael Steele generated some buzz when he said in a Washington Times interview that Republicans would be developing an “off-the-hook” messaging strategy to connect to a wider cross-section of voters.

More interesting, I thought, was Steele’s assertion that developing a deep bench of prospective GOP candidates would be his top priority, rather than enforcing policy orthodoxy in Congress. To quote: “I don’t plan to dictate policy under any circumstance. What I can do is tell them how the party base feels about the policies they will have to confront, like the stimulus bill.”

But yesterday, with Fox News’s Neil Cavuto (and mentioned in Politico, where I saw it), Steele suggested he’d be open to having the RNC support primary challengers to the three Republican senators who voted for the stimulus bill: “My responsibility is to follow the lead of the state parties, to get their advice, what their intent is. Those senators are going to have to account to those voters there.”

Indeed, the senators will have to account to the voters in their states. And if a primary challenge is in order, so be it. But the chairman should be careful about sending mixed messages. You can’t simultaneously say you won’t “dictate policy” and threaten retribution against party members who don’t vote a particular way on a particular bill. When you do that, you are, in effect, dictating policy.

The party’s decision to support primary challengers should be based on a variety of factors, including a member’s overall voting record. To single out specific votes would have a chilling effect on thought and speech within the party.