« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Saving the National Republican Rules from the Ginsberg Blunders in Tampa

Circulated by me January 20, 2013 to members of the Republican National Committee.

***

Dear RNC Colleague,

On January 13, I submitted to our Chairman and our Secretary the below motion to amend The Rules of the Republican Party.

In the years before our 2012 Republican National Convention, the RNC’s Standing Committee on Rules (one member per state and territory) met to consider possible changes to The Rules of the Republican Party each time the RNC met.  That Committee, one third of our RNC members, worked diligently, debated carefully every proposed amendment, reviewed its years of work at its meeting in Tampa, and adopted a report to send to the whole RNC for its consideration.

Some of the proposed rules changes incorporated in the report of the Standing Committee on Rules were intended to open additional channels by which power in the RNC could flow more easily from the bottom up.  The deliberations of the Standing Committee were productive.  Acting independently, members of the Standing Committee generally agreed that it’s a good idea to increase the opportunities for power at the RNC to flow from the bottom up.

The report of the Standing Committee on Rules was presented to the full RNC, which frequently in the past has exercised its right to amend its Standing Committee’s report before sending it on to the Convention Rules Committee for consideration.  Then the Convention Rules Committee’s report is submitted to the national convention  for its consideration.

In 2012, the RNC opted not to amend the report of its Standing Committee on Rules, which was not considered very controversial in the Standing Committee or in the full RNC.  So the Republican National Committee unanimously approved its Standing Committee report and forwarded that report to the Convention Rules Committee

The next day, in the Convention Rules Committee, Ben Ginsberg, a Convention Rules Committee member from D.C., representing himself as the spokesman for the Romney campaign, began to propose amendments to the report from the RNC.  First, he systematically submitted amendments to reverse the few and useful changes adopted by the Standing Committee and the full RNC to open up slightly the flow of power from the bottom up in the RNC.  Then he supported a number of brand new amendments to increase the centralization of power in the RNC.

Although some members of the Convention Rules Committee strongly objected to Ben Ginsberg’s obviously centralizing power grabs, most members of that committee went along with everything he wanted.  After all, he was presumed to be speaking for the candidate we were about to nominate for President.

You will recall, however, the immense, immediate outrage at the convention and from the grassroots against the Ginsberg power grabs.  The national convention’s consideration of the Convention Rules Committee report was a uniquely ugly scene.  What Ben Ginsberg did was particularly foolish because none of the changes he pushed would in any way help us win the coming presidential election.  All he accomplished regarding the 2012 election was to make grassroots conservatives fiercely angry at the Romney campaign.  Of course, if Mitt Romney had been elected in November, there was no chance at all that he would have  trouble with the Republican National Committee.  No Republican President fails to get exactly what he wants from the RNC.  In sum, the power grabs were a stupid move, and our Party is still suffering the consequences.

Grassroots conservatives and libertarians have and use many social media networks.  They can communicate instantly and for free.  Since the national convention and to this day, there is vigorous condemnation of our national Party for Ginsberg’s power grabs, which eliminated non-controversial reforms and deliberately (and unnecessarily) centralized our party even more.  A lot of this criticism is directed personally at Reince Priebus.

This criticism of our party and our chairman makes it much harder to do what we have to do, which is to attract more newcomers and build a superior grassroots election organization for 2014 and beyond.

Instead of further centralizing the Republican Party, we should welcome newcomers and treat them fairly,  politely, and cordially.  What good is it to centralize power if doing so prevents us from recruiting new grassroots activists to our Party and building an organization which can win future elections?

I happen to train thousands of conservative newcomers every year for success in politics.  I know that, if passed, my motion to “de-Ginsberg” our party rules will be greeted enthusiastically by newcomers we want to join us in our efforts to defeat the plans President Obama and his leftist allies are wreaking on our country.

A record vote on my motion would let everyone know where each of us stands on this matter.

Cordially,

 

Morton Blackwell

Virginia Republican National Committeeman

 

***

 

Dear Mr. Chairman and Madam Secretary,

Below is a motion I propose for passage to amend The Rules of the Republican Party.

According to Rule 12, such amendments must be submitted with at least ten days notice, be passed by a majority of the RNC Standing Committee on Rules, and be passed by a ¾ vote of all the members of the Republican National Committee.  I ask for consideration of my motion to amend at our coming meeting in Charlotte, North Carolina.

In sum, my amendment would, with the exception of the new Rule 12 (which the RNC may not amend), restore our Rules to the text which was proposed after years of deliberation by the RNC Standing Committee on Rules and then unanimously approved in Tampa by the Republican National Committee.

Here is Rule 12:

The Republican National Committee may, by three-fourths (3/4) vote of its entire membership, amend Rule Nos. 1-11 and 13-25. Any such amendment shall be considered by the Republican National Committee only if it was passed by a majority vote of the Standing Committee on Rules after having been submitted in writing at least ten (10) days in advance of its consideration by the Republican National Committee and shall take effect thirty (30) days after adoption. No such amendment shall be adopted after September 30, 2014.

Here is the text of my motion to amend the Rules:

“Pursuant to Rule 12, Rules 1-11 and 13-25 of the Republican National Committee are hereby amended to be the Rules adopted by the 2008 Republican National Convention, as subsequently amended by the Republican National Committee pursuant to Rule 10(d), and further as unanimously recommended on August 23, 2012 by the Republican National Committee, that Rules 1-11 and 13-25 be changed.”

I ask that the RNC Counsel’s Office prepare for distribution to all RNC members the text of The Rules of the Republican Party, with the appropriate re-numbering of the Rules,  as those Rules would read if my motion should pass.  This would assist discussion.

Cordially,

 

Morton C. Blackwell

Virginia Republican National Committeeman

Get Alerts

COMMENTS

  • plumely

    Mort, thank you for the diary. I want to support everything you have said because I truly think the GOP botched the convention right down to their choice of Clint Eastwood( and not to mention Chris New Jersey First Christie). However, I don’t understand what you are talking about here. Could you in plain english explain it to a dumb person like me?

    • Jim_Riggs

      I can’t believe I’m encouraging someone to link to WND but this acticle
      may answer your question.

      http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/gop-rebel-rises-to-challenge-party-establishment/

  • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

    Good luck and Godspeed on fixing this problem.

  • conservitas

    The RNC is still posturing to abolish primaries and simply “annoint” the general election candidate who they want to run — which will of course ALWAYS be the Establishment Republican choice.

    • http://www.theprecinctproject.wordpress.com ColdWarrior

      And unless conservatives get involved inside the Party where they live (which they did not do in sufficient numbers between 2008 and today to change the makeup of the RNC), expect more bad stuff from the RNC.

      For example, where I live, in Arizona, the state committee is meeting on Saturday to elect a new chairman and other officers.

      The chairman is a member of the RNC. Will the RINO running for chairman win or will it be the conservative? The conservative candidate will have my vote.

      The McCain/McKyl/McFlake forces are desperately trying to prop up a “conservative” candidate to fool the conservative state committeemen to vote for their guy.

      Which candidate wins simply depends on whether a majority of the state committeemen who vote are RINOs or conservatives.

      And who elects the state committeemen? In Arizona, the elected precinct committeemen in each legislative district elect the state committeemen.

      Each legislative district gets to elect one state committeeman for every three elected precinct committeemen in the district.

      Who elects the precinct committeemen in each precinct within each legislative district? The registered Republicans in each precinct.

      How does one get on the ballot for the office of precinct committeeman? All one has to do is get ten signatures or fewer on a nominating petition and fill out an affidavit that one lives in the precinct. Most candidates win by default, because only 52% of the PC slots in Maricopa County, for example, are filled and about 40% of the precincts had no candidates in the 2012 primary election in which the PCs are elected.

      The RNC doesn’t have enough conservative members because not enough conservatives are involved “inside” the Party, as precinct committeemen, where they live. Period. About half of the PC slots in our Party, on average, in every locale, are vacant. Do the math. Fill up all the vacant slots and you’ll have a conservative majority inside the voting ranks of the Party.

      Plus, instead of having a half-strength Party for the GOTV efforts, we’d have a conservative majority leading a full-strength Party GOTV effort.

      There’s about 400,000 Republican PC slots nationwide. About half are vacant.
      Oh, and the RNC won’t explain any of this to “the little people.” None of the above is on the GOP.com web site. Why not? Because they don’t want you to know any of this.

      Will conservatives finally get involved inside the Party where they live?

      I hope and pray they will.

      Thank you.
      CW
      http://theprecinctproject.wordpress.com

      • checkmate2012

        Hey CW, did you see my comment to you here: http://www.redstate.com/checkmate2012/2013/01/20/organizing-for-america-is-this-bhos-civilian-national-security-force/#comment-773605557

        • http://www.theprecinctproject.wordpress.com ColdWarrior

          checkmate2012,
          No, I had not seen it. Thanks for alerting me to it and thanks for getting involved where the rubber meets the road in Texas.
          Thanks again,
          CW

          • checkmate2012

            Have to keep Texas Red! Sadly the politicians that post here don’t stick around to reply. So I’ll ask you thinking you know the answers yet knowing it wasn’t your post or quotes:

            “Ben Ginsberg, a Convention Rules Committee member from D.C., representing himself as the spokesman for the Romney campaign, began to propose amendments to the report from the RNC.”
            .
            1. Did Ben G. actually represent Romney?
            2. As a member of the Rules C., how could he make unilateral amendments? Isn’t he just one of many? How did he hold so much sway is what I’m asking.

    • ryan_tew

      Ain’t that the sad truth. The RNC and GOP don’t want to hear any dissenting voices within their own party. They’d rather hand select a candidate instead of letting the primary process vet the best candidate. UGH.

  • PowerToThePeople

    I do not like the rule change that allows rules to be changed without the 2/3 vote. But as to the other rule, I am not taking a position as I do not understand the implications of the rule. So I must ask:

    What is the problem with the winner of the state being able to control the delegates. From everything I have read this rule was made to offset the BS Ron Paul minions pull when they sneak into the delegates then refuse to cast their vote for the winner and instead vote for Ron Paul. I am probably missing something here, but I do not see any problem with the winner getting the votes he won and excluding the POS Ron Paul from being able to hijack the process. I am of the opinion that anything done that ticks off Ron Paul and his followers is a good thing. I despise the man, I despise his followers, and I despise their tactics.

    So if anyone can explain how that rule is wrong, I am more than willing to listen.

    • ryan_tew

      The reason we don’t want a “winner-take-all” system is that it does not allow fair representation of Delegates at the convention and squelches the voice of grassroots voters within the Republican Primaries. Numerous people within the Santorum, Bachman, Gingrich and Paul camps all agreed that going for winner take all style voting disenfranchises new voters coming into the Republican party.

      Considering how weak the Republican party is right now, any infusion of passion and life will be a boost. Otherwise this party is doomed to unravel slowly over the next few elections until it’s a withered shell of its former self.

      Your ad hominem attacks on Paul are trite and make you look foolish. He did not “hijack” anything and his supporters followed the rules to a “T”. The fact that they were the most organized, passionate and spirited new blood in this party simply frightened many within the establishment sector of the GOP and RNC.

      If the “old right” continues to fight with the new blood in the party then it will certainly find itself losing more often.

  • becky5

    Thank you for doing this Mort. What Ginsberg did at the convention was an outrage. Again, thank you.

  • docnick

    In my above post I suggested the GOP will not support conservative candidates. This article is suggesting the same.

    All politics is about centralizing power in the hands of a few. Nothing in our system could be more destructive. These few, over time, has destroyed the GOP from the inside.

    Obama and the DEMS are not our the conservatives problem. It is US not them.

  • joseph23006

    It is obvious that they don’t trust outside the core of the deaf, blind, and dumb (in both sesnes). I know I will no longer support the national and state committees until they actually begin to listen to those who will become former supporters!

  • camelotk

    And who is the cartoonist who wrote the “Obama says Ban Guns” ad? He never said that, and couldn’t if he wanted to – he, and every other Dem knows every American has the right to bear arms. We just want SAFETY and RESPONSIBILITY to be a part of that ownership. IE, background checks. You will continue to lose elections as long as you shout “FIRE! COMMUNIST! NAZI! NAZI! NAZI” to scare people on every single subject all the time. Nobody listens to what Americans now call “the Crazies”, anymore. That would be you. Grow up, and if you want to debate an issue, then try to figure out a way to have a legitimate argument. “NAZI!” is not it. You’ve turned your party into a national joke.

    • checkmate2012

      I didn’t read the word “gun” once in this post so not sure I understand your comment here. I found the post educatoinal on the delegate process.