GOPer: Rules change would prevent ‘dictatorial’ convention
A member of the Republican National Committee trying to revamp GOP rules for nominating a presidential candidate says without the change, party leaders could exert “almost dictatorial power” at this July’s nominating convention. The criticisms by Solomon Yue, RNC committeeman from Oregon, were the latest broadside in an internal GOP battle over the rules that will help decide the party’s standard-bearer for the White House. The comments, included in an email he sent Monday that was obtained by The Associated Press, come two days before party leaders gather in Hollywood, Florida, to discuss whether to propose changing bylaws for the convention. The fight pits Yue and some allies against GOP Chairman Reince Priebus and other top party officials. It underscores the high stakes as the convention in Cleveland, Ohio, looms as the first in four decades that may begin without a presumptive presidential candidate. The RNC said Monday that Priebus will oppose any effort to change the convention’s rules at this week’s Florida RNC meeting. The RNC can recommend convention bylaws, but only the convention’s 2,472 delegates can adopt them. Priebus believes “the rules of the convention should be decided by the delegates elected by Republican grassroots voters,” the RNC said in a statement. With Priebus and other top party officials arrayed against him, Yue could face an uphill battle. Henry Barbour, RNC committeeman from Mississippi, said he sees little support for “a change three months before what would be the first open convention in 40 years. Nobody wants to look like they’re trying to give an advantage to one candidate or another.” Yue wants the convention to use Roberts Rules of Order, which would let delegates block the convention’s presiding officer from allowing the nomination of fresh candidates for president. GOP conventions have long used House of Representatives’ rules, which give the presiding officer more unfettered power to run each day’s session. “I believe in democracy and majority rule of the delegates and am concerned that almost dictatorial power the House rules give the chairman of the convention will lead to confusion, chaos, manipulation and revolt at the convention,” said Yue’s email, which he sent his 55 colleagues on the RNC’s rules committee. Yue wrote that Oregon Republicans want him to “stop the D.C. establishment from parachuting in their favorite candidate as a ‘fresh face’ into the convention.” He said the party is in “a period of mistrust.” House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., is expected to be the convention’s presiding officer. He has said he wouldn’t accept the presidential nomination, but others have held out hope that he or another fresh candidate could emerge as the candidate. Many in the party want businessman Donald Trump and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, the leading contenders, and Ohio Gov. John Kasich, who trails, to be allowed to battle it out without facing a new rival who’s not run for president this year. In an interview, Yue declined to predict whether he would prevail when the GOP’s rules committee considers his proposal this week. He said if his plan is rejected, he will push for its approval by the full RNC and then at the July convention, where he said he believes the delegates will look more favorably at it. “The anger is from outside the party, the grassroots,” Yue said. “They don’t want to see the chairman of the convention get absolute power.” Republished with permission of the Associated Press.
GOP official rails over effort aimed at nomination rules
In an extraordinary display of internal discord, the chairman of the Republican Party’s rules committee accused top GOP officials Saturday of “a breach of our trust” by improperly trying to impede a proposed change in bylaws that would make it harder for party leaders to nominate a fresh candidate for president. Bruce Ash, RNC committeeman from Arizona, wrote the harshly worded email to the other 55 members of the GOP rules committee that he chairs. The confidential email, obtained by The Associated Press, was written days before party officials gather in Hollywood, Florida, for preliminary discussions about what rules the GOP will use at its presidential nominating convention this July. Ash wrote the note at a time when some top Republicans consider the party’s two leading presidential contenders, billionaire Donald Trump and Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, to be likely November election losers and have discussed how to replace them with alternatives at the summer convention in Cleveland, Ohio. It is possible that no contenders will have the 1,237 delegates needed to clinch the nomination at that gathering, which would produce the first GOP convention without a presumptive nominee since 1976. Trump has bitterly clashed with party leaders over rules that he claims have been rigged against him, a charge party leaders deny. Ash said he has “become troubled” during discussions with RNC Chairman Reince Priebus and other party officials that by not making the proposed change, GOP officials “could use their power to attempt to achieve a political result” at the nominating convention. He said the convention’s presiding officer could use existing rules to “unilaterally reopen nominations to allow a candidate to be nominated that is viewed as more acceptable, which is exactly what so many rank-and-file Republicans across America fear.” His email did not mention that House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., is expected to be presiding officer for much of the convention. Some opponents of Trump and Cruz have suggested that Ryan, his party’s 2012 vice presidential candidate, would be a preferable presidential nominee this year, but Ryan has said he doesn’t want to be tabbed. In an email sent hours later, RNC chief counsel John Ryder said the controversial amendment would, in fact, be included among the items given priority consideration when party officials discuss convention rules this week in Florida. But echoing the view of Priebus and some other Republicans on the party’s rules committee, Ryder added, “Major changes now are dangerous and not a good idea, in my humble opinion.” Many Republican leaders have said party officials should not change current convention rules for fear of being accused by the competing presidential candidates of tilting the bylaws to influence the outcome. They have noted that the final decisions on the rules will be made anyway by the convention’s 2,472 delegates, probably on July 18, the gathering’s first day. When Republicans meet in Florida next week to discuss their rules, Oregon RNC committeeman Solomon Yue wants to propose not running full convention meetings under the rules of the House of Representatives, a long tradition. Instead, Yue wants to use Roberts Rules of Order. Yue and others say under the Roberts rules, it would be easier for the convention’s delegates to vote to block an effort by the convention’s presiding officer to consider new nominees for president. Under House rules, the presiding officer has more power to make decisions about the proceedings. Ash said RNC officials have repeatedly asked him and Yue to withdraw Yue’s proposal or even to cancel this week’s GOP rules committee meeting. Ash said he refused. He said that last Thursday, Ryder “convened a rules committee whip call to strategize against and led the opposition to the Yue amendment at the chairman’s request.” He said during that call, RNC officials acknowledged that Yue’s amendment had been “pre-submitted” by a deadline that would give it priority treatment his week. But the next afternoon, Ash said, the RNC sent an email “incorrectly stating” that Yue’s proposed amendment had not been submitted in time to be included in the agenda for next week’s meeting. That would deprive it of priority consideration. “In view of the above, I consider this to be a breach of our trust,” Ash wrote. He added, “In light of this breach and an apparent unwillingness to conduct a proper debate on the amendment, is it prudent for the RNC to continue to give the extraordinary power of the House rules to the presiding officer of the convention, as opposed to the more transparent, democratic and majoritarian rules in Roberts?” Ryder wrote that party officials thought they were following Yue’s desire to circulate his amendment to delegates early next week, even though Yue submitted his proposal in time for the earlier “pre-submission deadline.” “Of course, we wouldn’t have left out Mr. Yue’s amendment from the notice if we thought he wanted it included,” Ryder wrote. Republished with permission of the Associated Press.
Darryl Paulson: Conventions have been disrupted by credentials, rules, platforms
(Second of three parts) Political parties have held conventions in America since 1824. Many aspects of the convention have changed little in almost two centuries. This year, because the Summer Olympics are being held in August, both major parties will conduct their convention in July, with Republicans going first in Cleveland and Democrats following in Philadelphia. The first televised convention took place in 1940 when New York City’s NBC affiliate broadcast the Republican convention in Philadelphia. The other major networks quickly joined in and provided gavel-to-gavel coverage. As John Chancellor of NBC noted in 1972, “convention coverage is the most important thing we do. The conventions are not just political theater, but really serious stuff.” That attitude changed by 2004, when all the major networks cut back their coverage to several hours at night. As early as 1996, the networks were complaining that little of substance takes place. Ted Koppel, host of ABC’s Nightline, announced in 1996 that he was going home because the Republican Convention “is more of an infomercial than a news event.” What changed? It is true that many of the conventions of the 1940s through the 1970s made for great television. Platform fights were common, sometimes leading to a walkout of delegates. Just as explosive were fights over rules changes and the city of delegates. What made for good television, made for bad election results for the parties. They did not want to project an image of a divided party to the American electorate. Both parties instituted rules that made conventions less dramatic. The party image improved, but television now found conventions bland. During the first two days of the convention, the delegates decide on credentials, rules and the party platform. The credentials process determines the seating of state delegations and resolves any challenges to their legitimacy. The major credentials challenge in modern political history took place at the 1964 Democratic Convention. Two delegations from Mississippi both claimed to be the legitimate one. One delegation was the traditional, all-white Democratic delegation. No blacks were members or even allowed to participate in the selection of delegates. The other delegation came from the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party (MFDP), which was open to both whites and blacks. The MFDP argued that its members should be seated because the party was open to all races, supported the party platform and backed the election of Lyndon Johnson. Many in the all-white delegation opposed the platform and its civil rights plank, and many supported Republican Barry Goldwater for president. Johnson selected his Vice President, Hubert Humphrey, to negotiate a solution. Humphrey’s solution was to seat the all-white delegation and several members of the MFDP. At all future Democratic conventions, race couldn’t be a factor in selecting delegates. Like most compromises, neither side was pleased. Platforms have often produced divided conventions. At the 1948 Democratic Convention in Philadelphia, the delegates narrowly approved a stronger civil rights plank introduced by Minneapolis Mayor Hubert Humphrey. Southern Democrats walked out and met several weeks later in Alabama and selected South Carolina Gov. Strom Thurmond to lead the Dixiecrats. Democrats feared that the split would cause Harry Truman to lose to Republican New York Gov. Thomas Dewey, but Truman won by a slim margin. The 1964 Republican platform led to a split between the moderate and conservative wings of the party. When the Goldwater forces defeated a moderate civil-rights plank by a 2-1 margin, it was clear that the Republican Party had moved to the right. Disputes over party rules have also led to disastrous conventions. In 1968, there were only 15 party primaries for the Democrats. Party committees or party leaders chose most delegates. The party leaders selected Humphrey and not the anti-war candidate Eugene McCarthy. In response to the 1968 fiasco in Chicago, the Democrats formed the McGovern-Fraser Committee to revise convention rules. The committee recommended that in the future, most delegates must be selected in primaries or caucuses, and that the delegates had to mirror the population of the state they represented. McGovern would be the Democratic presidential nominee in 1972. Some found it more than coincidental that the person who wrote the rules changes became the next nominee. Many Democrats considered McGovern too radical to win, and “ABM” committees (Anybody but McGovern) sprang up to oppose him. His opponents tried to stop McGovern by denying him all of California’s delegates that he won in a winner-take-all primary. The effort failed, but in retaliation, McGovern forces challenged Mayor Richard Daley‘s Chicago delegation as not meeting the diversity requirements. Daley and the other 58 members of the Chicago delegation were thrown out of the convention and replaced by a diverse slate elected by no one. For probably the first time in his life, Chicago Sun-Times journalist Mike Royko supported Daley. Royko said the new delegates contained only one Italian and three Poles. “Your reforms,” wrote Royko, “have disenfranchised Chicago’s white ethnic Democrats, which is a strange reform.” After McGovern lost 49 of the 50 states to Richard Nixon, the Democrats were back in the reform mode. This time, they created over 700 “super-delegates” who were party officials and elected Democrats who would be guaranteed seats at the convention and help to select the most “winnable” Democrat. If Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic nomination because she has the overwhelming support of super-delegates, look for Democrats to once again reform their rules. Republicans would never do that. They are still following the rules their grandparents made. (Tomorrow: Donald Trump needs 498 more delegates to avoid contested convention.) *** Darryl Paulson is Emeritus Professor of Government at USF St. Petersburg. He can be reached at darryl.paulson@gmail.com.
Marco Rubio donor meeting raises possibility of brokered convention
Facing unsteady ground as Super Tuesday approaches, Marco Rubio is bracing for the prospect of a brokered Republican Convention in Cleveland this July. CNN reports on a closed-door meeting with about 200 Rubio supporters and donors Wednesday evening, where the campaign considered options as a stopgap measure against the nominations of either GOP front-runner Donald Trump or Ted Cruz. According to two people at the private event, Terry Sullivan, Rubio’s top adviser, used a PowerPoint presentation and question-and-answer session to outline two possibilities for the Florida senator to secure the Republican nomination. “One is somebody — Trump or Rubio — wins enough primaries to sew up the nomination in advance of the convention,” one attendee told CNN. “The other is that nobody does, and the two candidates go to the convention.” The campaign is working overtime to convince potential donors that Rubio is the viable establishment alternative to either Trump or Cruz, and that he has a legitimate path to victory. Yet Trump is the one approaching the Super Tuesday primaries March 1 as the undisputed Republican front-runner, with decisive wins in New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada. Rubio, in comparison, has yet to win a single state. Although only hypothetical at this point, a brokered convention seems increasingly conceivable, particularly in light of Rubio’s Wednesday meeting. Nevertheless, the attendees said Sullivan remains confident that Rubio would win in Florida, despite recent polling showing him lagging behind Trump. One major question shadowing the entire event was whether giving to the Rubio campaign would not be a waste of money, as it was with for Jeb Bush, who exited the race last week after a poor showing in South Carolina.
