The Wacky World of Delegate Selection

This is just a random though, but the same Debbie Belcher that proposed this nonsense be added to our state party bylaws is also a pledged delegate in the 1st District for the noticeably pro-tax, pro-amnesty, pro-big government Mike Huckabee, who pretty much stands on the other side of everything that Debbie's silly amendment proposed.

Discuss....

Our Party is Better than this

My RedMaryland colleague Michael Swartz reports that all of the proposed bylaw amendments passed, with the exception of the incumbent protection amendment. The most damning of these amendments to pass was the one calling for an oath. And I have to say that the State Central Committee members screwed the pooch on this one.

The members of the Central Committee have adopted an amendment to the bylaws that calls for an undefined, Orwellian sounding loyalty oath to the party. Aren't we, as a party, better than this? Do we need the members of the Central Committee to swear loyalty to do anything other than execute the duties of their office? And furthermore, who determines what this oath is? Is it the Central Committee? Is the Executive Committee? And what does the oath mean the Central Committee members swear allegiance to? To the Constitution? To the flag? To John Flynn?

This amendment to the bylaws seems nothing more than a power play to create a oath that can be used to bludgeon opponents of whoever is in charge at the time. We as a party should be better than this, and it is awfully disappointing to see the State Central Committee go along with such an Orwellian idea...

One opinion on the Bylaws Changes

This was forwarded to me anonymously. As always, anybody who wishes to send me a response is more than welcome to, and I will post unadultered as I have this:

Here’s one persons opinions of the proposed Changes to State GOP Constitution and By-Laws:

Summary:
This is a naked power grab by Pelura and John Flynn. This gives them absolute power over the State GOP and the County Central Committees and significant power over Elected Officials and Candidates (via a new State GOP primary endorsement mechanism). Furthermore, the ability to disagree or to speak up has been severely curtailed. Finally, if you cause too much trouble, you can be easily removed.

Other key points are that there is no place for Clubs or Activists to speak or to be heard. There is no mechanism to curtail spending, even though the State GOP is thousands and thousands of dollars in debt. There are two very personal proposals, one to give John Flynn a significant salary increase and the other to ensure that Brian Harlin can never be the Chairman of a County Central Committee or on the Executive Committee.

More Specifically:

1. Currenlty, there is no method in the State GOP Constitution or By-Laws by which the State GOP may involve itself in a contested Republican State legislative, County or City primary election. The proposed change would allow the State GOP to pick sides in a primary by a simply 2/3's vote in the State Executive Committee. It should be noted that for Federal Candidates, the RNC (and ergo the State GOP) have a mechanism that allows pre-primary support.

It should be noted that many believe that Jim Pelura and his staff (vis-a-vis John Flynn) have spent the Summer and the Fall stacking the Executive Committee to ensure a 2/3's majority. Dirk Haire removed, Mike Collins removed, etc.

2. The Brian Harlin Rule (as allegedly named by John Flynn). A proposed resolution would ensure that people like Brian Harlin (staunch GOP supporter and former Central Committee Chair from Howard County) could never be elected to the State GOP since they have a business that serves Republican candidates.

3. Proposal to change the Convention Rules. This change requires convention attendees to propose any changes to the rules prior to the convention. What is not said, however, is that no convention rule changes will be allowed once the convention starts. Furthermore, the Proposed Convention Rules are extremely restrictive and preserve almost complete control and power to the Chairman (i.e., Pelura). In addition, the Convention Rules do not allow anyone other than elected officials and executive and central committee members from talking. Furthermore, if you are not a member or an elected official, Pelura has the right to have the Sergeant at Arms (i.e. Bouncer) remove you from the room. Finally, Pelura has the right to cut off discussion by any person if he believes it to be a personal attack or innuendo.

4. Proposal to state that Central Committee Members may not endorse Democrats or Independents in any race that includes a Republican. What is missing is the same requirement for the Executive Committee and the State GOP Staff.

5. Proposal to ensure that members of the Executive Committee not be elected officials nor a candidate. What is missing is the same requirement for Central Committee Members.

6. Proposal to give Pelura unfettered authority to reinstate John Flynn's previous salary - even though State GOP is between $100k and $150k in debt and even though previous Executive Committee cut John Flynn's salary.

7. Proposal to increase the number of Executive Committee members by two (move from 3 Vice Chairs to 5 Regional Chairs). This idea is not being supported by Flynn and Pelura. Such an increase would make it harder for them to get a 2/3's majority (see above).

8. Proposal to require an Oath of Office for Central Committee Members. Key is that you must swear true allegiance to the State GOP Constitution and By-Laws. So, if a Central Committee Member disagrees with something Pelura or the Executive Committee or John Flynn does, they have violated the Oath and can therefore be removed from Central Committee.

Make of it what you will.

BREAKING: 10 am GOP insiders meeting Tuesday morning

Just passed on to me....GOP Chairman Jim Pelura is having a meeting of select party insiders tomorrow morning to discuss strategy dealing with this weekend's State GOP convention in Westminster.

Information indicates that the Chairman is trying to head off a potential coup attempt at the pass, as well as to make sure that the oft discussed bylaw get pushed through the full State Central Committee apparatus.

Apparently, the opposition has printed and will be distributing this weekend "Don't Blame me, I voted for John White" bumper stickers.

More info as it becomes available...

Full Circle

Michael Swartz brought the Special Session and members of the Republican Caucus full circle when he made an excellent point about the pro-tax Republican legislators and the proposed State Central Committee bylaws.

You remember those don't you? Particularly the one that would give the party the opportunity to endorse candidates in a primary?

As Michael notes:

It's something to keep in the back of our minds for 2010, and another reason that any effort at "incumbent protection" should be rebuffed at our upcoming Fall Convention.

Because the last thing that the state party needs to be doing right now is to protect any Republican who led us down this road of tax increases. This is the time to avoid any Linc Chafee/NRSC moments and to make sure that the bylaws are not amended to give protection to any incumbent (or any challenger to an incumbent, for that matter, given the current environment in certain Congressional races).

GOP Bylaw Amendments: California Dreamin'

David Kyle notes that Debbie Belcher's proposed language comes from the platform of the California Republican Party. And it is. Lifted word for word.

Because things are working so swimmingly for the California Republicans, you know...

GOP Bylaw Amendments: The Bizarre

Debbie Belcher's Purpose of....well, I'm not really sure:
Debbie's concerns about the Oath of Office and multiple voting are accurate. You can read all of her comments here. However, this is where things fly off the rail:

Section 1. Purpose.
The Party exists to secure honest and responsible government, founded on our belief in the worth and dignity of every person.

Add the Section below to follow the above:
We, the members of the Maryland Republican Party, believe in the inalienable, natural rights of each individual as endowed by our Creator, including the rights to life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness. We agree with our nation's founders that government is instituted to protect those rights and will oppose all efforts to interfere with their legitimate exercise. The Republican Party is committed to protecting and defending the Constitution of the United States, which is the law of the land, and further to interpreting the Constitution in its original intent as written by the Founding Fathers. The Republican Party recognizes that the United States is a republic, governed by laws enacted by elected representatives pledged to protect the rights guaranteed in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights

The Republican Party, from its inception, and under the leadership of its first President, Abraham Lincoln, has championed justice, equal rights, and opportunity for all, regardless of race, religion, gender or national origin. We are proud that our President, George W. Bush, has put into action our messages of hope, opportunity, family values, and individual rights; which is an inclusive message for all who love freedom, believe in individual rights and responsibility, and believe in government of the people.

There are so many things here that are just incredible to see in writing. The fact of the matter is that Debbie's comments are nice, until you remember that the Republican Party is not an instrument of religion. We are not the party of a particular President (certainly not one who has turned his back on many of our basic conservative principles).

Our purpose as a party is exactly what the current purpose says it: to secure honest and responsible government. And beyond that, to ensure that we are a strong nation with a limited central government. Or, as I noted in May:

It is time that our party reject those issues that divide us as conservatives, and unite around those core issues that bring together all wings of the Republican Party. We must bill willing to embrace fiscal responsibility, particularly when it comes to eliminating pork barrel projects. We must be willing to reduce the size of government in order to ensure to contain government only in the areas where it belongs. We must protect our national security, in order to protect us from foreign nations and from the presence of illegal aliens. And we must ensure that we are committed to upholding all of our Constitutional rights.

We do not want a government based on whatever Belcher's statement is supposed to mean. Her comments indicates that she prefers a party based less on principle and more on buzzwords that are meant to convey a party that is far to the right of the mainstream Republican voter.

Sure, it may sound cute now, but a statement of purpose should represent we as Republicans want to stand for today, tomorrow, and twenty years from now. We are the party of liberty and limited government. Sometimes, it seems like we forget this.

GOP Bylaw Amendments: The 800-pound Gorilla

The Party shall not, without the prior approval by at least a two-thirds affirmative vote of the State Executive Committee, contribute money or in-kind aid to any candidate for any public or party office except the nominee of the Republican Party or a candidate who is unopposed in the Republican primary after the filing deadline for that office. Nothing in this section shall preclude any member of the State Central Committee from personally contributing money or in-kind aid to a candidate in a Republican primary or Party election.

And there it is right there. A potential systemic shift in the way the Maryland Republican Party conducts its elections. With a two-thirds vote of the State Executive Committee, the Party can anoint the chosen one in any primary election it desires.

The Republican Party is, ostensibly, the party of ideas. We are the party of the people. We are the party of individual accomplishment and achievement. Upon passage of this bylaw amendment, we wipe all of that away. Instead of being a party based on principle we become a party based on access, on relationships, and on cliques. Get 26 people to go your way, and the (potential) cash and organization of the Republican Party come with it. It is no longer about ideas, and about support, and about community, but about cash, and contacts, and having West Street on your side.

And undoubtedly, such a proposal at the state level would then lead to proposals being bandied about at the County level. Given the lack of leadership displayed here in Anne Arundel County, doesn't that bother you a bit?

The proposal to endorse candidates is wholly inappropriate for any party, much less one that is strives to be a meritocracy. It should and it must be defeated.

GOP Bylaw Amendments: The Bad

We addressed the (generally) good portions of the bylaw proposals in our previous post. However, there are some issues of concern with these proposed amendments:

1. Endorsement of Candidates in the Primary
The 800-pound gorilla in the room. We're going to save this for separate post.

2. Central Committee Members can be removed by the State Executive Committee if they fail to take or abide by the Oath of Office
There seems to be little reason, if any, for the State Executive Committee to step in and remove a member of a local Central Committee. The local Central Committees are elected by the voters of the jurisdiction in which they represent. What is even stranger is the fact that the Oath of Office is not listed in any documents that have been publicly presented to date. Lord only knows what these Central Committee members would be asked to be pledging an oath to.

3. The "Brian Harlin Rule"
Basically, the rule would prohibit any member of the Central Committee from receiving campaign funds. I don't necessarily disagree with the concept of the rule but, once again, it turns into a debacle because of how it is executed. It is clearly targeted at one individual in order to punish that individual for whatever reason, and smacks as somewhat of a Bill of Attainder. And besides, who is the party to tell a businessperson that they cannot participate in party affairs due to the nature of their business? Does that not sound like something the Democrats would try to pull?

4. The Oath
Numerous references are made to this newfangled Oath, and as I mentioned earlier nobody actually explains what this oath is. Do we really think the party needs to be taking a "Loyalty Oath" to the party? Does that not seem a touch Orwellian? Because that's what this sounds like. The only oath, as far as I am concerned, that Central Committee members need to take is one in which they swear or affirm to execute their office.. Whatever other oath the party comes up with is likely inappropriate (and several Anne Arundel Central Committee members take issue with the seeming lack of an oath here and here).

5. Salary of Executive Director and Staff
The bylaw proposal would allow the Chairman of the Party to hire new Executive Directors and Staff Members and get approval of their salaries and benefits packages by the State Executive Committee only if the salary and benefits increase. Would it really hurt us to have some oversight by the Executive Committee in this regard?

GOP Bylaw Amendments: The Good...Generally

Well upon review of the proposed bylaw amendments, (some of which are generally technically amendments), the substantive ones generally break down three ways. Some amendments are very good amendments. Some amendments are very bad amendments. And one amendment/proposal is completely out of far right field. We'll break them into individual posts.

You can view the entire proposed new bylaws in an annotated version here, the recommendations of the Bylaw Review Committee here, and view comments from Anne Arundel Central Committee members here and here.


1. Prohibiting Central Committee members from supporting non-Republicans in partisan elections
This just makes common sense. We cannot have Republican Central Committee members publicly stumping for Democrats as we have seen here in District 31. I do not necessarily, however, think the provision referring to penalties set forth by the State Central Committee is the way to go, as these matters should be dealt with first and foremost at the local level. But this proposal only works if the proviso for primary elections are removed. That is a whole different ball of wax, but including the proviso of supporting "official" candidates in the primary could really gum the works up.

2. Introduction of Resolutions
This is really inside baseball stuff here. Basically, it would remove a provision require a resolution to go through the Resolutions Committee before it is submitted for discussion at a party convention. Common sense stuff here.

GOP Bylaw Amendments: The Email

As I noted yesterday, Mike Collins sent out and extensive, detailed email late Monday night detailing the situation regarding some proposed amendments to the Bylaws of the Maryland Republican Party. First things first, let's display Mike's email. Then, in another post, I will come back with some analysis and comment:

Fellow Republicans:

This is a long explanation of some of the turmoil surrounding proposed changes to our By-Laws. This is important to all Republicans, and I urge you to read this email and the attached documents.

There has been a lot of chatter about proposed changes to the Maryland State Republican Party by-laws. In particular, there is some concern about a proposal to allow the party to give endorsements and material support to select candidates. In an email last week, the Executive Director characterized as 'misleading' comments that the changes would allow pre-primary endorsements.

In order to clarify the issues, I have attached several documents that were emailed out after the State Party convention. As you may recall, a member of the House of Delegates falsely accused me of sending confidential party information to the press. So I would like to call your attention to the Bylaws Committee Report that is marked "Confidential." It was marked that way prior to the convention so its contents would not be shared before the convention with Republicans or others outside the Central Committee. It has subsequently been briefed in public and emailed out by John Flynn on May 21, 2007 to a large list, so privilege is no longer attached.

At present, there is no mechanism in our by-laws that allows the State Party to take sides in contested primaries. Any such support in prior elections was in violation of our policies and should have been addressed. But the proposed by-laws change does not prohibit endorsing candidates in a contested primary. It actually creates a mechanism where the Party can endorse candidates and provide material support to select candidates in contested primaries so long as .666 of the County Chairmen agree. This provision gives power to central committee chairmen outside our county to horse trade in smoke-filled rooms and decide which candidates to endorse and to whom to provide material support. Please read the proposed by-laws change and see how it can be used, not how it is being sold.

There are other by-laws proposals that are controversial as well. One would create an oath. As you will see from the by-laws, this oath is not defined, but appears in several locations in the proposed by-laws. Violation of this undefined oath carries penalties, including removal of Central Committee members. At present, our Clerk of Courts, Bob Duckworth swears in all newly elected members at the first convention. Despite this, there is a proposed by-laws change that would create an additional undefined oath. Again, chairman from outside our county would now have the authority to shape your elected Central Committee membership. Please read the proposals. Also read the comments from our Central Committee members.

There are provisions to remove members who support candidates against Republicans in contested elections. I personally like this provision, but it is getting a cool reception from folks who have supported non-Republicans over Republicans in the past.

There are other proposed changes as well which smack of a power-grab by 15 West Street. One proposal would allow the Chairman of the State Party to order up meetings of county central committees at his whim.

Another by-laws change would reduce financial oversight of the Executive Board, by allowing the Chairman to hire staff up without approval up to the highest levels done previously, regardless of changes in the financial or political climate. This is particularly sensitive, as our chairman hired five full-time staff members, with a payroll of more than a quarter million dollars, without the required prior approval of the Executive Board. The compensation of the Executive Director, who chaired the by-laws review committee, is directly effected by this change, and a conflict of interest is apparent.

One proposed by-laws change has been dubbed "The Brian Harlan Rule." As you know, Brian Harlan owns the GOP Shoppe. He is very well thought of and was asked to stand for Second Vice Chairman of the party a couple years ago. The new by-laws change would prevent anybody from serving as an officer of the Maryland GOP if they receive remuneration for work on any campaigns. This by-laws change appears to target one person—Brian Harlan—to keep him out of the Party leadership.

There has been some muted discussion about developing a State and County party platform. This is coming from social conservatives who want to put abortion, gay marriage, and other divisive issues front and center in our party. At present, our Party stands on "I Am A Republican Because …" http://www.aagop.com/My_Homepage_Files/Page1.html

I think it is appropriate that we have a party coalesced around the 90% of issues that unite us, rather than the 10% that divide us. Sadly, some would like to fight Republicans over the 10% issues where we are not in complete agreement. I think that is bad for our party. In addition to developing a social conservative party platform, there is an attempt by some to use the by-laws review to embed the social issues in the by-laws.

The Anne Arundel County Central Committee reviewed these proposed by-laws changes at our July meeting and submitted our comments to the State party. I have attached comments that Jerry Walker put in pdf format from our chatroom discussions. I have also added Debbie Belcher's comments that she sent separately, and recently emailed to a wide audience.

The proposed by-laws changes are not some intramural game for the Central Committee. They are the rules that govern Republican Party politics, and they effect you. Please take a few moments to get acquainted with these proposals and voice your opinion. Again, if you have any questions on the by-laws, our public deliberations, or any other issue, please contact me directly.

Sincerely,

Mike Collins
Chairman
Republican State Central Committee
Of Anne Arundel County