At the Republican National Convention in Honolulu last week, the GOP decided after much negotiation, infighting and confusion to adopt a “platform test” encouraging the party to not provide financial support to candidates who do not “wholeheartedly support” the party’s platform.The key provision of the resolution reads as follows: “RESOLVED, that the Republican National Committee urges that no support, financial or otherwise, be given to candidates who clearly do not support the core principles and positions of the Republican Party as expressed in the Platform of the Republican Party adopted in the 2008 National Convention.” This version was drafted by RNC member Bill Crocker of Texas and was identified on the Huffington Post as a “flexible candidate litmus test.” It was then passed by the full RNC with a unanimous voice vote on Jan. 29. Absent are the 10 specific policy statements that my previous column, “GOP falters with stringent purity test,” said were in the final wording of the resolution. This column confused the “flexible candidate litmus test” with the watered-down purity test requiring candidates to agree with eight of 10 policy statements on issues including cap and trade, health care and same-sex marriage.Regardless, the thrust of the argument in last week’s column remains intact. While the purity test would have prevented the RNC from providing support to moderate candidates, the platform test “urges” the RNC not to support some moderate candidates. The new test “has nothing mandatory” in it, said Oregon GOP chairman Bob Tiernan, but its effect will be to alienate potential moderate candidates.The resolution passed by the RNC, whether called a “purity test” or a “platform test,” sends a message to candidates that little dissent will be tolerated in the Republican Party. The resolution is practically a restatement of the Republic Party’s commitment to support Republicans, but this does not dull its intended impact. Crocker explained the resolution will still “bar funding for those judged to be too far to the left.” This resolution gives party officials more leeway to interpret the definition of “too far to the left.” More conservative officials will likely use the vaguer wording as justification for favoring extreme candidates over moderates, while other party officials may realize the prudence of welcoming moderates. But with the Republican Party increasingly worried about mollifying the Tea Party movement, don’t be surprised if the platform test has the ultimate effect of pushing Republican candidates farther to the right, a proposition that will not help the party’s electoral ambitions. Weinberg junior Jordan Fein can be reached at [email protected].