The RNC Rules Battle Continues -- NOW Push for RNC Rules Change

[WhistlinDave]

And I must tip my hat to whoever it was who recently pointed out on RPF that the "Dems have ground game over there - now we don't." Wish I could remember who said it to give credit where credit's due.

 

[devil21]

And I must tip my hat to whoever it was who recently pointed out on RPF that the "Dems have ground game over there - now we don't." Wish I could remember who said it to give credit where credit's due.

That would be me.

 

[georgiaboy]

any further updates? saw this today: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/04/rnc-rejects-most-rule-changes-89928.html

Snips:

A nearly four-hour fight at the RNC Spring meeting, which unfolded in a windowless ballroom of a fancy hotel, showcased the mounting tension between the establishment and movement conservatives, for now in cahoots with Rand Paul supporters, over the direction of the party in the wake of last November’s electoral thumping.

The full RNC still needs to approve the proposal on delegate allocation at a general session Friday. Its fate is uncertain, and D.C.-based party leaders might try to block it. Any change to the rules requires support from three-quarters of the 168 members. It passed the smaller committee by only a 31-20 margin.

Division within the rules committee suggest that RNC Chairman Reince Priebus will face difficulty in winning buy-in for many of the recommendations made last month by a five-member task force he convened on how to win elections again.

 

[eleganz]

We just have to wait for 3/4 of the the rnc voting body to ratify the rules. I will be there Friday, a lot of the LA guys are there today I think.

 

[sailingaway]

We just have to wait for 3/4 of the the rnc voting body to ratify the rules. I will be there Friday, a lot of the LA guys are there today I think.

I hope it passes. Mind you the CHANGE never passed by a counted majority, at all.

 

[sailingaway]

Would it be possible if a super majority doesn't pass it, to call the prior vote at RNC invalid with just a majority? Because truly, it never occurred.

 

[eleganz]

Well they are using rule 12 (rule that can change rules between rnc conventions with 3/4 of the rnc body) to address rule 16.

So in my opinion, it would be bad to unacknowledge the tampa rules after acknowledging the new rule 12 but failing.

I think at this point, anything is worth a shot though.

 

[sailingaway]

I don't know, you tried to do it without overturning the cart, but the cart was never legitimately approved, with its supermajority requirement to make it so much harder to undo than the not even majority vote forcing it through was. Which is legitimate?

 

[itshappening]

I will be shocked if it gets 3/4th to pass. The establishment can kill this very easily and it will be interesting to see if they opt to do so.

 

[sailingaway]

Ashley Ryan ‏@AshleyRyanRNC now
Standing vote on removal of 16a1. Appears to have failed. Awaiting official counts. #RNCrules


not good

 

[sailingaway]

Ashley Ryan ‏@AshleyRyanRNC now
Official count for removal of 16a1: 49-107. Amendment is defeated. #RNCrules #tcot

so if 3/5 won't remove it maybe a majority will say it was never properly passed? Because it certainly was never properly passed....

 

[Dorfsmith]

Rand Paul forces suffer setback vs. GOP establishment:

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/04/rand-paul-gop-libertarians-establishment-90018.html

 

[sailingaway]

Rand Paul forces suffer setback vs. GOP establishment:

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/04/rand-paul-gop-libertarians-establishment-90018.html

What I wonder is if a motion can be made to confirm that the rule was never properly passed, and if so if that motion invalidating the vote at RNC can pass with less than 3/5 since the vote at RNC to MAKE the threshold 3/5 never passed.

As a reminder:


Not coincidentally, this was the same vote and rules change that RETROACTIVELY changed the requirement for a GOP nomination on the floor of RNC from 5 states to 8 states, after 6 states had already filed to nominate Ron -- even AFTER he had so many state delegations arbitrarily stripped from him -- and he would have had a nomination speech from the floor of RNC without that.

Frankly, the primary campaign being over and other 'favorites' of grass roots backing Romney, of delegates there, mostly only those who wanted Ron to win cared if he in particular got a speech. I think more rank and file were willing to vote for the change, not understanding it, than otherwise would have. Ex ante, when also Santorum, Palin, and whomever else may be the next grass roots power house in 2016 would need it, more should see it our way. And it never got a counted vote to start with. It did NOT pass, imho.

 

[WhistlinDave]

What I wonder is if a motion can be made to confirm that the rule was never properly passed, and if so if that motion invalidating the vote at RNC can pass with less than 3/5 since the vote at RNC to MAKE the threshold 3/5 never passed.

As a reminder:


Not coincidentally, this was the same vote and rules change that RETROACTIVELY changed the requirement for a GOP nomination on the floor of RNC from 5 states to 8 states, after 6 states had already filed to nominate Ron -- even AFTER he had so many state delegations arbitrarily stripped from him -- and he would have had a nomination speech from the floor of RNC without that.

Frankly, the primary campaign being over and other 'favorites' of grass roots backing Romney, of delegates there, mostly only those who wanted Ron to win cared if he in particular got a speech. I think more rank and file were willing to vote for the change, not understanding it, than otherwise would have. Ex ante, when also Santorum, Palin, and whomever else may be the next grass roots power house in 2016 would need it, more should see it our way. And it never got a counted vote to start with. It did NOT pass, imho.

It absolutely didn't pass. It was fraudulently passed. I wish there was a lawyer who would take on that case on a contingency (I mean a lawyer who knows how to put together a proper complaint on paper). The evidence makes it really easy to prove rules of order were clearly violated. All that would be needed would be for someone to file a lawsuit for breach of contract. Someone with provable damages. (Airline tickets to the pretend convention, cost of a hotel room, etc.)

I hate to be redundant because we've talked about this before and I forget who first pointed it out, but all party members agree to follow party rules. That includes party leadership. When they break those rules, they are guilty of breaking their end of the agreement. It's breach of contract when they screw over the rest of the party members like that.

Nothing will change until someone holds Boehner, Priebus, and Ginsburg accountable for this fraud perpetrated on party members. The actual damages might be small but there should be huge punitive damages for this sort of thing. So... Anybody know any Liberty minded lawyer with brains and guts?

 

[Constitutional Paulicy]

It's as if they are rubbing salt in the wound.

I for one had my fill of this BS during the election. Once again, the establishment tightens its grip on force feeding us their preordained hack.

 

[Barrex]

It absolutely didn't pass. It was fraudulently passed. I wish there was a lawyer who would take on that case on a contingency (I mean a lawyer who knows how to put together a proper complaint on paper). The evidence makes it really easy to prove rules of order were clearly violated. All that would be needed would be for someone to file a lawsuit for breach of contract. Someone with provable damages. (Airline tickets to the pretend convention, cost of a hotel room, etc.)

I hate to be redundant because we've talked about this before and I forget who first pointed it out, but all party members agree to follow party rules. That includes party leadership. When they break those rules, they are guilty of breaking their end of the agreement. It's breach of contract when they screw over the rest of the party members like that.

Nothing will change until someone holds Boehner, Priebus, and Ginsburg accountable for this fraud perpetrated on party members. The actual damages might be small but there should be huge punitive damages for this sort of thing. So... Anybody know any Liberty minded lawyer with brains and guts?

..

 

[sailingaway]

I'm seeing tweets on this being a blow to activists, I really think they should get pretence of rule adoption voided. Seems to me that would only take a majority not the 3/5 that is only required because of the 'change' that never actually passed.

I don't know the procedure rules on that though.

 

[Peace&Freedom]

The GOP rules exist, clearly, only to give the appearance of a figleaf of legitimacy to the nominating process to the public, just as their party platform, which the national candidates basically disregard, is only there to placate the rank and file about their having principles and a coherent philosophy.

In reality, a major party is actually dominated by the interest groups and establishment power blocks (military contractors, banksters, AIPAC, etc), not by rules or principles. Unless the Paul faction develops overwhelming numbers in the party organizations and shows up, the rules will continue to get fudged just enough to frustrate the movement, while the establishment maintains surface respectability.

 

[speciallyblend]

The GOP rules exist, clearly, only to give the appearance of a figleaf of legitimacy to the nominating process to the public, just as their party platform, which the national candidates basically disregard, is only there to placate the rank and file about their having principles and a coherent philosophy.

In reality, a major party is actually dominated by the interest groups and establishment power blocks (military contractors, banksters, AIPAC, etc), not by rules or principles. Unless the Paul faction develops overwhelming numbers in the party organizations and shows up, the rules will continue to get fudged just enough to frustrate the movement, while the establishment maintains surface respectability.

like to add,
as they continue to lose elections by alienating republicans.

 

[Constitutional Paulicy]

like to add,
as they continue to lose elections by alienating republicans.

I'm beginning to believe they will never learn.