The Convention, The Slate and The Delegation

One of the controversies from our state convention was over The Slate and in particular, how delegates were chosen for the National Convention. I have a history with The Slate.

At the 2000 GOP State Convention I chaired the Platform Committee, but some readers may also remember that I got into a procedural shouting match from the floor with then Chairman Kayne Robinson. The procedural point is not important but the topic was the National Delegation (for Philadelphia). 

At the 2004 GOP State Convention, I declined to have my name put on the slate (for New York), since my daughter had to report to the Washington DC to serve as a House Page. Instead I was slated to chair the Nominating Committee and I was the public face of The Slate.

In 2008, I had a part in developing The Slate within the 2nd Congressional District. And I have been elected as a district delegate to the National Convention.

I do not have a problem with The Slate. In my opinion the success of The Slate is simply the result of hard work and organization. The Iowa Christian Alliance has done a good job of getting their supporters out and elected to key positions like the Nominating Committee. If you have a problem with The Slate, my advice is ... organize, organize, organize. Anyone who wants to can do the same thing — if they have the votes.

So, I am an apologist for The Slate. In the end, The Slate was hammered out with input from a variety of constituencies, not just ICA. A look at our delegation shows that in addition to ICA people, leaders of the McCain, Huckabee, and Ron Paul camps are well represented in the delegation.

But this week an issue has arrived related to our national delegation that I do not support. Since the convention, there have been some vacancies in our delegation. According to RNC Rule 17, in the last 10 days before the National Convention, the delegation can fill its own vacancies. Today, the leadership of the Iowa Delegation sent out an e-mail asking delegates to vote yes or no on replacing those who will not be attending the convention.

I know that the list of replacement delegates came about as the result negotiations between parties including the McCain campaign. And I want to be clear that I have no problems with any of the replacements. My problem is that sending out a list of names and asking for a majority vote by e-mail does not allow delegates to propose alternate nominees.

Unlike The Slate where any group with the votes can be effective, the mechanism chosen to select replacement delegates stifles input form delegates. As I said, my issue is not with who the replacements are, in fact I support them. I have an issue with how they are chosen.

I think the replacements will get a majority, but in protest, I  am voting no.

Comments

[here is the letter]

Dear Delegate to the 2008 Republican National Convention,
We have vacancies in our delegation.
Rule No. 17 of the Republican Party (as adopted by the 2004 Republican National Convention)
for the 2008 Republican National Convention permits the delegates to fill the vacancies.
We propose the following names to fill vacancies:
Gopal T.K. Krishna to fill the vacancy created by Morris Hurd, a At-Large Delegate.
John Bloom to fill the vacancy created by Carmen Reitsma, a At-Large Alternate to Morris
Hurd.
Paula Dierenfeld to fill the vacancy created by Larry Smith, a At-Large Alternate to Carmen
Boal, a At-Large Delegate.
Morris Hurd to fill the vacancy created by Scott Spray, a At-Large Alternate to Loras Schulte,
a At-Large Delegate.
All delegates are free to nominate any other person or persons to fill the vacancies. If you
nominate any person to fill any vacancy, please make sure that that person will attend the 2008
Republican National Convention and have a place to stay if that person is elected to fill the vacancy.
If the majority of the delegates concur with the proposed names, it will be considered that the
delegation agreed to fill the vacancies with the proposed names.
If the majority of the delegates do no concur with the proposed names, we will conduct an
election among all the nominees on August 28, 2008.
Please reply to the above email address ( slscheffler@aol.com) by stating that you either concur
to fill the vacancies with the proposed names or with your nomination(s) before 1:00 P.M. on
August 24, 2008.
We will inform results of all responses to all of you on August 25, 2008.
Thank you for your time and cooperation.
Steve Scheffler David Roederer
Chair of the Delegation Co-Chair of the Delegation

[here is the letter]

David,

You need to understand that they did it the way they did it because of the people they chose to put back in the delegation. (Krishna, Hurd) They did it that way because of the people they chose not to put in the delegation. (Grassley, Latham, Mosley, Miller, Baker)

A friend

[Andy Cable]

This action only further shows the divide that Scheffler is creating. Gopal was voted out by the State Convention. This is a slap in the face of those that voted against Gopal at Convention. The act of having Hurd step down as a Delgate and his alternate also step down to allow Gopal to be nominated under such ridiculous situation in apalling. Then only to bring Hurd back as an alternate to another Delegate is so transparent. If Hurd was elected to be a Delegate and plans to attend then he should as Delegate. This is not "good organization and planning" but rather playing fast and loose with the rules and manipulation.
To wait till the ninth day before the convention to announce it is a sham. This was planned and known before and if announced a day earlier would have allowed the choice to made differently. This is plain and simple back room politics at its worse. It does show the lengths this new leadership will go to manipulate the rules and justify the ends by any means. It also once again shows a pattern of contempt for others in the party they illustrated in the State Organization Committee fiasco.

Scheffler did not ad Grassley and stated it was an oversight. Did he offer it to Grassley this time? No- Did he offer it to the only State Co-Chair in the country Leon Mosely that was not given a chance to attend the National Convention? No -
The McCain people were not offered this seat. It was only done to get Gopal reinstated through the backdoor. Just another example of Polk County politics wanting to run the entire state. Our highest elected State politican, our State Co-Chair nor early prominent backers of our Presidential candidate Senator McCain do not warrant a Delegate position ahead of someone that was voted out as a National Delegate by the entire State Convention?
David your loyalty may be an admirable trait. However if you allow yourself to be duped in defense of a just cause by those that only use such cause to further their own egos and thirst for personal power at the expense of anyone that gets in their way then it is sad.
The message they preach is not the message they practice.

[Brent Oleson]

The Slate as you call it is just another form of a herd of animals, wherein the weak are protected by the strong by numbers alone. True, you do have the votes, and good for you. But it is exclusionary, and in my opinion, a bit socialistic (reminiscent of the Soviet days and their style of elections). I take a look at some of these members and I shake my head in amazement. Just spend a little time researching their contribution levels to Republican candidates. Pathetic.

I too will be apologetic, to all those who won't come to conventions or central committees anymore. I apologize because I continue to them because I continue to see their point and keep asking them to return. They won't with these practices.

[HawkeyeGOP]

Andy,

You do note that I voted against this action. I think that every member of the delegation should have the opportunity to make nominations to fill the vacancies.

[Nicky Baker]

David,

As a rules person, can you answer some questions I have about all of this?

Are the District Delegates included in this notice and are they allowed to vote?

Are the At-large Alternates included in this notice and are they allowed a vote?

Are the District Alternates included in the notice and are they allowed to vote?

I learned of this 2nd hand and did not receive a notice of my own. I am a district alternate.

Also, this seems to have come out on a Friday and expects a response by Sunday 1pm. As far as I can tell all notice was given by email; no phone calls or any other notice given from what I can tell.
Is this within the rules as well?
How can one know for certain that an email was read when it was not responded to?
How can we know that each of the delegates have received this information before the deadline to respond?

I do note that you are going to vote against it, but that does little. Even if everyone asks to have nominations and vote; then we are asking people to drive into des moines on short notice to settle this matter.

[Concerned Genuine Republican]

I think Steve should hear from all of us that disagree with his questionable methods 515 971 7363 It's our duty as genuine Republicans to watch our "leaders" just as we need to watch our government leaders.

[Roberts Rules of Order]

The guy who writes this blog - David Chung - has not been going to meetings in his district and is suckling at the hairy teat of Steve "the destroyer" Scheffler and needs to be taken out.

David, you will be lucky to have one term on the SSC. If you make it that long, you either won't be running in 2010 or we'll ensure you are defeated and fully embarrassed for your abominable actions.

You are playing a key role in the destruction of the Republican Party of Iowa and your actions should not be tolerated.

If Democrats win more seats in November, we'll remember who was out to destroy the party. David Chung and Steve Scheffler.

Mad that the Democrats raised taxes? David Chung and Steve Scheffler divided the party and are just as guilty about destroying Iowa's economy.

Mad that the Democrats repealed Right to Work? David Chung and Steve Scheffler weakened the Iowa GOP so it could happen.

Mad that the Democrats grew government? David Chung and his friends who want to destroy the Iowa GOP are responsible for allowing a strengthened Iowa Democratic Party.

If November 4 is bad, you wait until November 5. David Chung's nightmare begins then.

[HawkeyeGOP]

Nicky Baker,

These are RNC rules so I am not as familiar with them. There is a link in the post to the specific RNC rule.

As they were interpreted, delegation was taken to mean delegates only. I am a district delegate and I was included in the vote. The rule is pretty vague as to how the delegation is to choose replacements.

[Andy Cable-]

David
I did not acknowledge your stand against the matter in which this sham election is being held nor your vow to vote against it. That is a good start.
I do question and would think your background in Rules would flash a red light also on the validity of the Sunday Aug. 24 vote. The things I find most troubling are - Have all Delegates been notified and what proof do we have they have been? I have heard from some that they knew nothing about this Sunday deadline. I do not believe a simple email in this day of spam filters and those that accept only approved emails is an appropriate way of contacting ALL the Delegates with a notice. I also qustion what constitues a majority of the delegates concurring with the proposed list. Is this a majority of those that answer? A majority of the voting Delegates in total? If they do not answer would that constitue a NO vote? Who is in charge of counting these votes and determining if they are valid? How do we know a response sent to Scheffler via email is a legitimate Delegate?
There are way too many questions and if the handling of this procedure is another indication of the new leadership then I think it another example of manupiulation and gall on their behalf.
This procedure needs oversight and should be handled on the 28th in some type of regulated vote with all National Delegates being properly notified by registered mail and an open process for both nominating the replacements and validiation of the votes cast. Anything short of that leaves leaves a stinch on the process and perhaps even a question or challenge of the authority of who is seated at the National Convention.

[Andy Cable-]

David
Just saw your post in response to Ms Baker- you mention the interpetation of the rule? whose interpetation is this? Why should such interpetation be left to Scheffler and not handled by the full SCC or the duly elected State Chairman or perhaps the Party's legal console? Or perhaps a simple call to the RNC would clairify the vagueness you admitt to.
To ram through such a vote over the weekend without many of these questions and the ones I asked earlier being properly answered is wrong. It does not bode well for the new leadership to try and pull this off - especially when the prime reason for it is to overturn a vote taken at the State Convention they disagree with.
I once again question the legitimacy of this election and if allowed to stand as it is currently being proposed would strongly encourage a challenge to the National Credentials Committee be made.

[HawkCR1]

Rule 17 is VERY clear about how delegate vacancies are to be filled.

IF a vacancy occurs, the vacancy should be attempted to be filled in the same way that the delegates were first elected.

If that can not occur, it falls to the State Executive Committee of the Republican Party of Iowa to then fill those vacancies.

If the vacancies have not been filled by 10 days PRIOR to the beginning of the Rep. National Convention, then a vote of the delegation may be taken to fill the vacancies.

So..this leads to several SERIOUS questions that I hope David, as an SCC member you would pose to Mr. Scheffler

1. WHEN was Mr. Scheffler made aware of that elected delegates were NOT able to attend the RNC?

2. Did Mr. Scheffler inform the State Party chair, Stu Iverson, of said vacancies.

According to information on Friday from Mr. Iverson--He had NOT been made aware of these
vacancies.

Friday the 21st would be 9 days before the start of the RNC...how interesting..the 10 day window would have passed...and thus bypassing the State Exec Committee to fill the vacancies.

Thus..bypassing Stu, Leon Mosely, Steve Roberts, Phyllis Kelly, Nancy Miller. Mr. Scheffler does NOT control the State Executive Committee..so one can understand why Mr. Scheffler would NOT want to involve them in this issue.

I find it VERY hard to believe that Mr. Scheffer was NOT aware of these multiple vacancies before Friday...plus, time would have been needed for Mr. Scheffler to contact replacements and confirm their willingness to serve.

IF Mr. Scheffer withheld information from the State Party leadership..that is a serious violation of Republican National Committee rules..and a serious ethical violation of our National Committeeman-elect.

This could potentially set a situation in place where Iowa's full delegation may not be able to be seated at the Convention because of Mr. Scheffler's apparent violation of RNC rules.

[Nicky Baker]

Thank you for your response, but I still have questions.

If delegation was taken to mean only delegates and not alternates; then it should apply to all of the rules. If that is the case, then why was I allowed to vote on the leadership of the delegation, and the offices given in that vote?

Who made the determination of what the definition of 'delegation' means? Should we not have contacted the person in this state who has served on the RNC RULES COMMITTEE for many years who would have insight and knowledge as to the intended meaning of this section of the rules? Was Steve Roberts even considered to be contacted?

Also, I have spoken to at least one delegate who has not received this notice from 'the delegation' chair and co-chair. What will happen to this delegate's vote?

When did the chairman of 'the delegation' become aware of the vacancies?

Here's a quote of the pertinent lines of the rule: "the state party should make every effort to elect those individuals filling the vacancies in the delegation in the same manner as the delegates were originally elected or by vote of the state Republican Party executive committee or if the state executive committee has not filled the vacancy by ten (10) days prior to the convention, by vote of the state delegation."

Was the State Party Executive Committee even informed of the vacancies before the chair and co-chair made their recommendations?

I am very concerned about this and it is not because of who they chose to add to the delegation, but like you, how they have gone about this whole thing. I thought that we were going to move beyond self-serving political maneuvering when we elected the President of the CHRISTIAN ALLIANCE to serve us in this capacity. I know that everyone makes mistakes but????????? wow this one's a doozy!

[here is the letter]

take a look at this blogs take on the issue:
http://constitutiondaily.blogspot.com/2008/08/stuck-on-stupid.html

[HawkeyeGOP]

As to who knew what when, you will have to ask the principals involved.

As for rule 17. It was simply not going to be practical to reconvene the State Convention to elect replacement delegates.

The next choice, according to the rule, is the State Republican Executive Committee. The problem is that we do not have an Executive committee. Neither our bylaws nor our constitution define one. Roberts Rules suggests that such a committee is a smaller group that can act in place of the full board in the interim between meetings. Roberts Rules also clearly states that an Executive committee may only be created if the bylaws explicitly define it. (RRONR p. 468) I guess it might have been possible to throw this decision to the State Central Committee but it really is not an executive committee.

So the third choice is to let the delegation decide. I do not know who made the interpretation, about how to run the vote or whether alternates vote. As I have stated, think it should have been handled in some other manner.

[Nicky Baker]

Well, then I guess right now all I can add to this discussion is that when we amend the bylaws and constitution of our state party to deal with the convention committee issues we had come up earlier this year, and the district convention/nominating committee issues; we should also add something that defines an executive committee for our state party. Perhaps we should spell out in our by-laws how to fill delegation vacancies so that we don't have to defer to the national rules.

[Andy Cable-]

David
Why are we so quick to accept "interpetations" such as Delegation meaning only Delegates and not Alternates yet we question the terminology that the NRC uses when they say State Republican Executive Committee? I would think at the very least that would be in each state the people that are elected by the state's Republicans to run the party. In our state that would be the State Central Committee. I think if you at least check with them you would find they would agree. Not all states I would guess call their leadership the State Central Committee. Would it not be worth checking out some of these questions and "interpetations" instead of this accepting this eleventh hour attempt to usurp the will of the State Convention voters?

[Nicky Baker]

David-

Thank you for discussing this with us over the weekend. I have not been informed of the official results of the vote yet and was wondering if you had an official notice stating what will happen. I have heard hearsay, but nothing in print. Thanks.