This study first seeks to identify patterns in Party membership across all republics from the years 1956-1985. The election results were recorded for each republic’s central committee, bureau and first secretary. From this research, it seems there was an unusual amount of turnover in the years from 1959 to 1961 that historians have yet to notice, let alone explain. The results may offer other scholars a union-wide context to local events in numerous republics. Next, this paper will examine comparatively the cases of Latvian and Moldavian SSR in an attempt to offer partial explanations for trends identified in the first half of the paper. Both republics experienced high turnover between 1959 and 1961. The study examines the purge of national communists in Latvia, and the role played by local leaders and the Kremlin. Key figures in the Latvian events include Eduards Berklavs, Vilis Kruminish and Arvids Pelshe; for Moscow – Nikita Khrushchev, Mikhail Suslov, Aleksandr Shelepin and Vladimir Semichastny; in Moldavia – Zinovy Serdiuk, Ivan Bodiul and George Meniuk. By comparing changes in both Latvia and Moldavia, this places the two republics within a larger union-wide context and helps shed light on both better than when viewed in isolation. Of particular interest is the initial success of Bessarabianization and Latvianization, the similarities and differences between the two republics, and why the ultimate failure of these programs in each republic. The study finds major determining factors included individual personalities of faction leaders, interwar independence, and the unique influence of Romania on Moldavia. The paper draws upon newspapers, memoirs, central committee stenograms and interviews from Latvia and Moldova.