In one month the California Republican party is going to hold its Fall convention. There will be laughs and serious talk, meetings and cabals. At the end of the convention one item will be decided that affects the integrity of the Republican Party—the endorsement process. At this convention there will be bylaw changes to determine the process. It could either open it up, or give it away to the moneyed interests, the same folks that also donate to Democrats. As an example, in the 2011-12 cycle Charles Munger, Jr. donated $42,934,000. He paid for dozens of slate cards to get his people elected to county central committees, which in turn appointed people to the State Republican Party.
At what point is there no need to hold conventions and meeting, just ask the special interests or those spending over $40 million who do you want allowed to run? Pass this along—instead of going to Anaheim for a convention, maybe you should be going to Anaheim to visit Disneyland?
CA News & Views
Editorial by Stephen Frank: Who Should Control the California Republican Party Endorsements—Money or the Delegates?
Exclusive to the California Political News and Views, 9/4/13
In just one month, the Republican Party once again will consider endorsing candidates for office. In general, I am not in favor of political parties endorsing candidates for office. That is the right and responsibility of the voters of the Party, not the special interests, not the very wealthy and not the unions. A primary election should be about choosing candidates to represent your Party.
However, Guv Arnold and the money of Charles Munger, Jr. convinced the public that political parties should be nearly obsolete, According to them, during the primary, Democrats should be allowed to vote for Republicans and Republicans vote for Democrats - thereby allowing Democrats to choose which Republicans should represent the Republican Party. In the 2012 election that worked “so well” that twenty races only had Democrats on the November ballot and eight had only Republicans. For the first time in one hundred years Third Political Parties were almost completely wiped out of participating in the General Election.
Democrats got to choose weak Republicans, Republicans got to choose radical Democrats. The special interests and the unions had almost free reign over the nomination process. Oh, and one man, Charles Munger, Jr. did as well - he spent $43 million in the election cycle. See the Secretary of State report, here.
In response to that law being changed, which wiped out partisan party nominations, the California Republican Party (CRP) decided to endorse in the primary so that voters could know who the true Republican in the race. The process used, for that one time, was to have the Board of Directors endorse candidates for the June, 2012 primary. They endorsed, almost exclusively incumbents running for re-election to their current posts. The process included County Committees, in the involved districts, endorsing (or choosing not to endorse), before the CRP board would endorse. I watched the process, including the closed door sessions, as the CRP Parliamentarian.
Per the CRP bylaws, the Board is obligated to create an on going process at the Fall, 2013 State Convention (to be held Oct. 4-6). There are numerous proposals. Some people want to keep the board as the endorsing body. Others want to include the Counties in the process. To change the CRP bylaws will take a 2/3 vote of the convention. It has been noticed to many that if the CRP bylaws are not changed, then the 2012 process will be used for the 2014 election (this is only for legislative races, the statewide races must be done in 2015—so they are technically not affected by this effort—but can if the convention decides to do so).
My position is that no candidate can be considered unless they have a 2/3 vote of the counties in the boundaries of the District. Also, I would not allow alternates to vote, only actually members.
If we are to have an endorsement process, it must be fair, honest and as best possible - not a bought and paid for affair. The way to do this is to have the full convention do the endorsement process with a 2/3 vote needed of those present and voting.
How does the Democrat Party of California process endorsements for legislative and statewide office? First legislative candidates must be endorsed by their local Central Committees. Then all the delegates, without proxies have the opportunity to vote. For the Democrats a candidate needs 60% of those present and voting.
Lately, however, groups have undertaken proxy “drills” and one has been successful enough that they are able, when they want, to receive 200-300 proxies per convention. In fact, solid conservatives found out a couple of years ago that while they thought their proxies were being used by conservatives, they found their way to Arnold Republicans.
I believe that, since a California Republican Party endorsement is so important, the endorsement process should only be done by those physically present, no proxies allowed. There should be no question as to the honesty and integrity of the process. Proxies allow special interests to finance the drill and then promise anything, and get their candidates the nomination.
While endorsements by a political party in general is wrong, in my opinion, thanks to the lack of GOP voters being allowed to make the decision as to who represents our Party, an honest system must be created. Proxies, as they are currently used by the CRP, leaves a lot of doubt. The people of California deserve a political Party that represents their views. Can one person contributing $43 million, while legal, create the impression of widespread support for a candidate or cause? That $43 million is more than many unions donated in the same time period.
We should open the endorsement process to the Republican registrants. Close it to the corporations that donate to both Democrats and Republicans—in the same race. Just look at the donations in the Vidak/Perez race and the PAC’s that donated to their “favorite” candidate. Endorsement should only be made by Republicans and in person.
