« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

BREAKING: Special Meeting of the RNC

Acting outside the confines and rules of the Republican National Committee, Grover Norquist’s Americans for Tax Reform (ATR) announced its intentions to host a debate for the 6 announced candidates – Mike DuncanMichael SteeleSaul AnuzisKen BlackwellKaton DawsonChip Saltsman – vying for the Republican helm on January 5, 2008. Norquist invited all 168 committee members to the debate, though they will not be permitted to ask any direct questions of the candidates. The committee members’ notable exclusion from ATR’s debate seemed to be an issue of contention for North Dakota Republican Party Chairman Gary Emineth, who, much to the ire of grassroots party activists, told The Hill, “At the end of the day, it doesn’t matter what the public thinks; it matters what 168 of us think.”

In a legitimate, but wholly uncommon move, Emineth began circulating a petition early last week among national committee members calling for a special session of the body prior to the committee’s already-scheduled January meeting. The special meeting would have no purpose aside from a RNC Chairman debate.

Characterizing the selection of the party’s next Chairman as one of the “most important things [they will] do as the national committee,” Emineth began floating the uncommon proposal with the intention of granting committee members the opportunity to directly question candidates for RNC Chairman. Morton Blackwell, regarded as one of the Party’s premiere parliamentarians, said Emineth’s call, while extremely rare, was conducted in a legitimate manner. And given current RNC Chairman Mike Duncan’s intention to seek a second term at the helm of the committee, Emineth argues it was the only avenue to avoid the perception of impropriety were the RNC headquarters – which remains under Duncan’s control – to initiate the call.

Emineth’s call for the special session remained unanswered, that is, until tonight.

According to the rules adopted by the Republican National Committee:

“Upon written petition of sixteen (16) or more members of the Republican National Committee, representing no fewer than sixteen (16) states, filed jointly or severally with the chairman, requesting a meeting of the Republican National Committee, it shall be the duty of the chairman, within ten (10) days from receipt of said petition, to issue a call for a meeting of the Republican National Committee, to be held in a city to be designated by the chairman, the date of such called meeting to be not later than twenty (20) days or earlier than ten (10) days from the date of the call.”

Bound by the rules of the party — which he had a hand in crafting — RNC Chairman Robert M. “Mike” Duncan sent an email to all national Committee men and women and state party Chairs and Executive Directors to issue a call for a special meeting of the 168 voting members Republican National Committee. The session, prompted first by Emineth’s petition and the support of 15 fellow committee members, will be held in Washington, D.C. on January 7th, 2008 – the same week as ATR’s debate.

The extent to which Grover Norquist could have potentially affected this race just plummeted for two reasons: Committee members want to have their questions asked, and not necessarily those of “base” supporters (The national party apparatus sets strategy, not policy – a distinction many well-intentioned activists don’t understand). And lastly, intra-party elections are unique: voters are educated and candidates are known quantities. The debates held by ATR, the Conservative Steering Committee, and now Emineth, will now more than likely not affect the outcome of the election.

Cross-posted at Skepticians.com

Get Alerts

COMMENTS

  • peg_c

    is not something folks like me follow, but I strongly suspect the views and attitudes of the 168 go a long way to explaining our party’s travails. “Screw the base” – now I know where that germinated.

    I don’t think our party has bottomed out yet – far from it. I pray I’m wrong.

    • AceInTX

      but after 20 + years of following this…I know we can’t continue to avoid the inside baseball if we ever hope to see our issues addressed…

      I’d encourage you to swallow the bile…and consider the unpleasantness of the inside baseball crap or we’ll never get out of the second class status we’ve been asigned by the inside baseball players!

  • Mark Malcolm

    This came right off the GOP website.

    http://www.gop.com/Connect/States.aspx

    Lobby these folks and we should make our point, assuming I have the right spot for the members of the RNC that is.

  • Martin Knight

    Apparently, particularly according to CA National Committeeman Shawn Steel, the so-called Conservative Steering Committee (the chairman of ) of the RNC is more concerned with keeping Mike Duncan in place than in actually having a Conservative as the RNC Chairman.

    Per the WashTimes …

    Two things triggered the idea for a special meeting. One was the formation of an ad hoc Conservative Steering Committee by three RNC members who said they wanted to ensure that a true philosophical conservative is elected national chairman. The other trigger was the steering committee’s scheduling the Jan. 6 invitation-only meeting in the District. The six candidates for chairman are invited to address the steering committee meeting, at which a straw poll will be held to see who is the favored conservative candidate.

    “The idea of the Conservative Steering Committee wanting to have a meeting well in advance to the election is a good idea – it is the exclusivity of it that is the problem,” Mr. Emineth said. “What is the committee’s definition of a conservative? Who is to make the judgment of who is invited? What are the hidden agendas?”

    “The purpose of petition is to directly challenge the so-called ‘straw vote’ from the so-called Conservative Steering Committee,” Mr. Steel wrote in an e-mail to other RNC members.

    “This [steering] committee was formed as a Duncan enterprise,” Mr. Steel wrote. “Its chairman is a RNC vendor. The committee has members who are not conservative. And many conservatives have not been invited. It’s exclusive by design.”

    Mr. Steel said he is convinced that the steering committee was selected to ensure that Mr. Duncan will wind up with a majority in the straw poll, which will be dutifully reported in the media and thus help persuade other RNC members that they had better get on board the Duncan train before it’s too late.

    Mr. Emineth agreed, saying, “I know conservatives who haven’t been invited. So there’s some concern that this steering committee and straw poll are a put-up job.”

    • AceInTX

      and is something I hadn’t included in my calculation…setting them aside I read Emineth’s actions 180 degrees in opposition to your reading…I need to dig some more ion the relationship of the CSC and Emineth’s position on Duncan and who he’s supporting…your analysis is likely spot on since you’ve obviously read more on it than I.

      That being said… the secret nature of this RNC special meeting can’t be ignored…It smacks to me of desperation as I say below…it looks to me like a bunch of power brokers who’ve been able to control everything in this Party from the shadows historically who suddenly find themselves exposed to the light of day and in danger of losing the perks and perquisites of the offices they hold and they are scrambling now to turn out the lights and return to the comfort of their obscurity…

      my guess is Norquist has scared them and they’ll come out of this special meeting with an agreement on who will be the RNC chair and how they will manage it to look like the base got what they wanted while they end up slithering back into the darkness with their power and perks secured for the future!

  • AceInTX

    and the other signatories to this petition smacks of collusion with Duncan to me!

    I’m reading desperation here…It looks to me that Norquist has struck a nerve! It’s why I’ve called on people to shine a light on the party process and bring these people and their machinations out into the daylight! They’re under the spotlight now and Norquist has called them out…this special session will no doubt be held in secret and they will come out of the meeting with a unified strategy on how to blunt the impact of Norquist’s play and allow them to maintain their stranglehold on the rest of the party an allow them to disappear back into the shadows!

    We need people to show up outside this meeting if they have it and demand to see what is going on! I’m not in a position to do it…but maybe Norquist and CPAC and some other Conservative groups can make a very public issue of the secrecy and back door dealings of these clowns!

  • http://dezignworx-ae.com tsquare

    ?At the end of the day, it doesn?t matter what the public thinks; it matters what 168 of us think.?

    True enough… now WE need to tell these 168 people who WE want!

  • AHALgal

    As a self-appointed conservative “community organizer,” I need more information on these candidates beyond their websites. My “anybody by Duncan” position needs a beneficiary for our appeals to the 168.

  • Martin Knight

    AHALgal is right up there.

    What we need to do is to secure commitments from at least three of the candidates who are not Duncan, and a Committee member who is in touch with the base, like Morton Blackwell, to have the debate made public, or, at the very least, have it recorded afterward and uploaded to YouTube, LiveLeak, GoogleVideo, etc.

    Though, I wonder why these folks couldn’t simply have sent a list of questions to each candidate like Blackwell did?

    Unless the fix is in?

  • jwebb

    I don’t know Gary Emineth and today is the first time I’ve ever heard his name. The quote in the Hill article sounds a little fishy to me. Sure, he is speaking factually when he says the 168 will make the decision, but his actions seem to indicate that he is trying to open the process to more transparency, not less. I would recommend checking out this exchange at thenextright.com and this referenced article in the Washington Times.
    The problem may not be with Emineth’s procedural move, but rather with the ‘Conservative Steering Committee’ who may be trying to stack the deck for Mike Duncan. I do notice that one of the CSC co-chairs is Bill Crocker from Texas. I have contacted Mr. Crocker and our RNC Committeewoman Cathie Adams and both have told me who they are endorsing. It is not Duncan.

    Contact your state RNC committee members to express your preference and encourage others to do so as well.

  • mbecker908

  • Arad1994

    Martin,

    If you’re referring to the debate sponsored by Americans for Tax Reform, it will be live-streamed at www.rncdebate.org.

    You’re also able to register to submit questions for the debate and vote up or down other people’s submissions.

  • AceInTX

    Unless the fix is in?

  • Martin Knight
  • Martin Knight
  • E Pluribus Unum

    Of Republicans? Not so much. We got plenty of organization. Just no leadership, no vision.

  • AceInTX

    Laughing 13

  • AceInTX

    ?At the end of the day, it doesn?t matter what the public thinks; it matters what 168 of us think.?

    This is exactly what’s wrong with this party…we have little or no influence on the 168 people who make the decisions at the RNC and the arrogance and dismissive nature of this comment shows just how out of touch with the rest of us the RNC truly is.

    Committee members want to have their questions asked, and not necessarily those of ?base? supporters (The national party apparatus sets strategy, not policy ? a distinction many well-intentioned activists don?t understand)

    First of all…if the job of the RNC is to set strategy…what exactly has the strategy been since Mike Duncan has been party chair? I mean…if the primary responsibility of the RNC has been ignored, why does Duncan think he deserves to be reelected…and by all indications…the 168 state party leaders who will vote for him think he should be reelected? Give me a break!

    Secondly, I don’t know how you have a strategy without taking policy into account? I mean…I know what the RNC policy is toward ideology not playing a part in what they do…I just don’t think that’s a realistic policy…

    For instance…don’t you have to consider a person’s ideology when deciding who should be the nominee supported by the party in different districts? If the question is a Senate seat in Maine and supporting Olympia Snowe over a more socially conservative candidate an important consideration? Or running someone like Arlen Specter in MissIssippi?

    Shouldn’t strategy take into account the fact that the party has no credibility and nothing to offer as an alternative to the Democrats because the party as a whole has walked away from the things that distinguished us from the other party? I don’t see how you avoid the dichotomy of strategy and policy…they each influence the other don’t they? Shouldn’t the RNC consider policy in order to determine how best to put forth a unified message? I personally think this is why we lose…setting the squish leadership aside…because the Dems run a unified campaign and focus their fire on us while we all run around like chickens with our heads cut off firing wildly and wasting ammunition wounding each other and doing no significant damage to the enemy!

  • gibbysr

    I have written to my RNC leaders and informed them in no uncertain terms of my objection to Mike Duncan. We only need to look at 2008 results to know he is not the person to lead this party. Sorry but even a blind person could see that one. I have provided my views as to why I believe Michael Steele is the person we need. He has national recognition and his website says it all. www.steelefor chairman.com. No matter who each of us support we must let the committee know who we want. Part of the problem has been too many of us have just silently set back and let them think they are in charge. It is past time to let them know the truth. That we will not sit silently by and let another election be hand to the democrats. Please tell all of your friends to let their voices be heard.