Ron Paul Meetup Group, Las Vegas
Video about the Convention
The Sordid Tale of the Nevada Republican Party and the Conventions of 2008
Latest News About the Convention -
Interview with Carl Bunce about Harassment of Nevada Delegates at the National Convention This radio interview took place on the last day of the convention and Carl talks about the surveillance and harassment of the Ron Paul delegates. Apparently the McCain organization went to great lengths and used improper methods to suppress any dissent.
Interview with Carl Bunce on Public Radio
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
By Robert Holloway
Sue Lowden, state party chairperson, was successful in delivering Nevada's 34 delegate votes to John McCain. I wonder what she will get out of it. It seems that her help did not influence McCain's selection of a vice presidential choice because the most helpful choice to Nevada Republicans would have been Mitt Romney. If Romney had been the choice, then Nevada's electoral votes would have almost certainly gone to McCain. But now this state is up for grabs.
But Sue Lowden's help to the McCain campaign has come at considerable cost to her own reputation. In deciding to stop the April 26th convention, needlessly and contrary to the rules, Sue Lowden had to work very hard to make a convincing case that what she did was fair and honest. She has lost that battle. For a few weeks after the convention, it appeared that she was successful in persuading the public and the news media that she really did have good reason for abruptly ending the convention. But I believe the turning point in public perception came with the Time magazine article of July. That long article was based in part on interviews with the Ron Paul partisans in Las Vegas. Time must have a circulation in the millions and is known for high quality journalism. The fact that Time wrote an article that was sympathetic to the Ron Paul movement and essentially rejected Sue Lowden's version of events seems to have made an impact across the country, not only in Nevada. By the time our handful of Ron Paul delegates arrived in Minnesota, the details of the April convention were widely known and they were greeted almost as heroes at the alternate Ron Paul event. Just to review, here is what the Time article said about the April 26th convention.
"In Nevada, where the liberty lobby is strong, McCain got trounced in the primary voting, coming in third behind Mitt Romney and Ron Paul. When the state GOP tried to crown McCain at its Reno convention in April, so many Paul supporters showed up that party leaders literally fled the hall, turned off the lights and postponed the convention to make sure the anemic pro-McCain camp wasn't swamped by liberty's marauders. It was like a John Ford western set inside a hotel ballroom."
Everything is absolutely accurate in the above account. Everything in it can be defended. As an aside, here is another bit of good writing about the climate in Nevada that produced the above result:
"If the freedom that lives in the Libertarian imagination has an earthly home, it is the American West. If it has a temple, it's Nevada. It's not just the low taxes or the libertine veneer of Las Vegas; Nevada is free, I was told, in part because so much of it is populated by an unbroken and unbowed caste of ranchers, miners and homesteaders who believe in the primacy of private property."
For those who say that the main stream media was consistently against the Ron Paul movement, this Time article stands out as an exception. And it is ironic that the most damaging blow to Sue Lowden's account of the convention came from the venerable Time magazine, long thought to be the mouthpiece of the eastern media moguls.
So Sue Lowden's considerable skills at spinning a political event succeeded only for a few weeks. In the end, the coy behavior of the party leaders in making a half-hearted attempt to restart the convention and the circumstantial evidence made it impossible for her explanation to be accepted. It was a close thing. She did something similar in 1998 at the county convention and was able to get away with it without it being noticed in the press. This time she was not so lucky. In addition to the Time magazine article, the panel on contests of the Republican National Convention saw through her excuses and wrote a withering review calling the party leadership "inept" and her actions unacceptable. Only political pressure from the McCain campaign allowed most of Sue Lowden's picks to finally make it to delegate status. The final report of the contest committee rejected the choices of the party leaders entirely and then renamed most of them under the authority of the rules of the national convention. Essentially the officials of the national convention accepted our claim that Sue Lowden had illegally named the delegates but then the same panel bowed to political pressure and appointed most of them again. One panel member resigned, apparently because he did not like the political pressure brought to bear on the panel.
For those who support high ethical standards in politics, the behavior of most of the party regulars was a disappointment. For instance, Bernie Zadrowski, the county chairman, quickly fell into line with Sue Lowden's version of events and has enthusiastically supported her in trying to get the McCain delegates seated in the face of the challenge. Bernie apparently has political ambitions. But he reminds me of the old style machine politics. Some of you may have heard of the old political machine of Mayor Richard Daly of Chicago in the 1960s and 1970s. Mayor Daly was a typical machine politician who was not sensitive to ethical issues. Bernie reminds me of that type of politician. If Bernie ever runs for anything in this state, I will not vote for him and I will work actively against him if I can.
So in summary, I believe that Sue Lowden's reputation has been greatly tarnished by her actions. She often talks very reasonably and says repeatedly that she wants the party to be open to all factions. But her actions are at sharp variance with her words. I have no doubt that her actions were wrong in an ethical sense. Now we have two months to wait to see what effect, if any, her actions will have on the election.
It is also worth nothing that John McCain must have been aware of all the details of the Nevada contest and in my judgment the fact that his campaign came down so much in favor of Sue Lowden does not give me a warm and comfortable feeling about his ability to run the country. Many of the Ron Paul delegates to the Minnesota convention say that they were followed by security agents and that some of their political literature was confiscated. This does not bode well for a McCain presidency. But I am sure that there will be many, with images of political plums in their eyes, who will find nothing wrong with such behavior.
The Decision of the Contest Panel of the National Convention August 16, 2008
Citing flaws in the selection process, a key Republican National Committee panel on Friday recommended that neither of Nevada's two dueling delegations be seated at the party's national convention in September. For more information, see the following link:
Decision of the Republican National Committee Panel
In addition, more legal moves by the insurgent faction are expected soon.
Older News
PRESS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Nevada Republican State Delegates File Suit Against State Party
RENO, NV, July 18, 2008—Nevada State Republican delegates have filed a complaint in Second Judicial District Court late this evening, contending that the Nevada Republican Executive Committee’s decision to appoint national delegates is in violation of State law. The complaint alleges that the GOP’s decision to appoint delegates to the Republican National Convention violates NRS 293 because state delegates have been deprived of their ability to select national delegates at a convention. “The State Executive Committee announced yesterday that they won’t bring the Nevada State Republican Convention out of recess,” said Wayne Terhune, a Republican activist in Washoe County. “They shut down the Convention in April, and now they aren’t giving delegates a chance to have their voices heard. This is a violation of the law.” The complaint alleges that the State Executive Committee’s decision is in violation of NRS 293, which states: “In addition to such powers granted it, the state convention shall select the necessary delegates and alternates to the national convention of the party”. The complaint has been filed by local attorney Mark Goodman on behalf of several Nevada State Republican delegates. Mike Weber, a local Republican who has served on the National Republican Rules Committee, announced early today that he is shifting the focus of his State Assembly race to make sure that the state delegates have their voices heard. “Most Republicans are getting fed up with party leaders because of underhanded tactics instead of principled leadership,” he said in a press release. “The announcement that national delegates will be appointed by a small group behind closed doors only reinforces this distrust.” “The actions of the State Party are taking away the voice of every state delegate,” said Terhune. “Over a thousand delegates attended the convention in April, and the State Executive party officials are attempting to silence all of them. This is completely against the traditions of the Republican Party and the United States of America.”
The Alternative Convention
June 30, 2008
By Robert Holloway
On June 28th, a rebel convention, not sanctioned by the Nevada Party Leaders, elected 22 delegates and 22 alternates to the Republican National Convention. We also ratified the election of 9 delegates previously elected at the start of the convention on April 26. This rebel convention was necessary because party leaders shut down the April 26th session after it became clear that they could not control the delegate election process. On April 26th, they lost control of the convention in a crucial vote of 750 to 405. From that point on, they knew they were in trouble and finally, using the excuse that time had run out, they recessed the convention contrary to the rules of the convention that required a vote on any recess. Their successful attempt to stop the election was what produced this rebel convention. Only delegates present at the April 26th session were able to participate in the June 28th restart. The June 28th restart attracted 327 credentialed delegates.
Will the results of the June 28th session be recognized by the National Republican Convention? Only time will tell, but it is very likely that the results of this session will be more legitimate than delegates hand picked by the party leaders. The party leadership may have their own final session on July 26th but all indications are that they do not want to do this and would prefer selecting their delegates by some other process other than a convention.
Whether or not the delegates selected on June 28th are recognized by the national convention, we believe that we have sent a strong message to party leaders that may deter them from using illegitimate methods in future conventions. If we had not done this and if we had just accepted their invalid shutdown of the April 26th convention, then we would be rewarding bad behavior. The party leadership has lied constantly about the reasons for the abrupt closing of the April 26th session.
PRESS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Nevada Republicans to Reconvene Nevada State Republican Convention on June 28th.
RENO, NV, 5/30/08--- Nevada Republicans have decided to reconvene the Nevada State Convention at the Grand Sierra Resort in Reno on June 28th. The Nevada Republicans say that the State Party has made no move to reconvene and has refused a turn-key convention offer from a local donor.
“The State Party has really left us with no other option,” said Wayne Terhune, a local Republican activist who made the turn-key convention offer to the Party. “We feel the Nevada delegates deserve the chance to have their voices heard and finish this Convention process. The State Party has not followed through with their promises to reconvene, and it has been over five weeks. The Party kept telling us they would reconvene, first in a week, then in two weeks, then in June, and then maybe July. But there doesn’t appear to be any real plans to reconvene, and the delegates have a right to get together and complete the Convention.”
The Nevada State Republican Convention was abruptly recessed on the evening of April 26th. National delegates had been selected from Congressional Districts 1 and 3, and votes were still being counted from Congressional District 2. National at-large delegates had not been selected when the Convention was recessed. The Nevada State GOP has indicated they are working on a venue but have yet to schedule the Convention, despite having five weeks to do so.
In order for the Convention to reconvene, a quorum (a simple majority) of credentialed delegates must be present. If the quorum is present, all business can be conducted, including the selection of national delegates and passing resolutions.
“This isn’t about one candidate versus another,” said Pat Kerby, a Nevada State delegate from Nye County. “This is about credentialed Nevada State delegates getting together to form a quorum and finish the business of the State Convention.”
The Republican activists reconvening the State Convention are all credentialed state delegates from the State Convention on April 26th , and are inviting every credentialed state delegate to come and have their voice heard on June 28th . “We intend to do this right,” said Wayne Terhune. “Everyone will have a fair chance at this reconvening. We think our chances of getting a quorum are excellent, because so many Republicans want to get this process completed. This is our chance to get this done right.”
END OF PRESS RELEASE http://www.dailypaul.com/node/54716
The following are various links about the convention, both the aborted convention and the restart:
Time Magazine Article that Includes Convention
A very comprehensive site about the convention controversy
Some Additional Remarks About the Convention by Robert Holloway
The halting of the convention contains many lessons for both insurgents within a political party and also for the party regulars who generally want to retain the leadership that they have enjoyed for a number of years. In this case, from the point of view of party leader Sue Lowden, recessing the convention must have seemed to be an attractive alternative to losing control of the delegate selection process. However, in the two weeks after the convention, that nuclear option appears to have been the worst possible choice.
The convention was held in Reno, approximately 500 miles from the major population center in Las Vegas. Party rules require that the convention be held in Reno this year, so the restart of the convention will have to be in Reno. Naturally, a restart in Reno is going to be annoying to most of the delegates who live in Las Vegas. Delegates pay their own expenses to the convention, so delegates from Las Vegas have already spent approximately $600 of their own money to go to an aborted convention that accomplished little. If the convention is restarted there are likely to be some dropouts and it is an open question whether a quorum can be had when it is restarted. If hundreds of delegates again make the trek to Reno and if a quorum is not obtained, then Sue Lowden will face even more anger and not only from the Ron Paul faction.
On the other hand, failure to attempt to restart the convention also has some serious consequences. State law requires that the Presidential Electors be selected by the convention. In addition, only about one-third of the delegates to the National Convention were selected before the abrupt recess.
There are also some lessons to be learned by insurgent factions. It is quite interesting that prior to the convention, neither side knew with any accuracy the relative strength of the various factions. A few days prior to the convention, the Ron Paul people would have been pleased to pick up 5 or 6 out of 34 delegates to the national convention. The state party and the John McCain campaign made considerable efforts to determine the strength of the Ron Paul faction. Prior to the convention, there were two deceptive polls of the delegates meant to determine the number of Ron Paul supporters. One of these polls came from the McCain campaign and the other from state party headequarters. The polls were deceptive in that the callers gave misleading informaton about the purpose of the poll. It is rather remarkable that state party leaders would use deceptive methods against their own members, but they did. However, Brian Kominsky, one of the leaders of the Ron Paul campaign, followed a policy of not making public the strength of the Ron Paul delegates, especially at the county convention some weeks prior to the state convention. Keeping the numbers confidential probably helped greatly in our success at the state convention. At the convention, those who refused to go along with the party leadership had an effective majority and quickly asserted control of the convention. The crucial vote was not even close, 752 to 405. The main point here is that the insurgents, after many months of work and planning, were much more successful than even we expected. If you are in an insurgent faction, be prepared for the possibility that you may have a working majority. We have noticed on several occasions that we can get an effective majority on issues that involve the basic fairness of the political process. That is exactly what happened at Reno.
We could have played our cards a little better though. In this case the convention was abruptly recessed, without any motion to recess and without any vote on the matter. We were so stunned that no one thought of raising a point of order to challenge the recess. Under our rules and under most rules, a recess done without a motion and without a vote is not legitimate. Be prepared for this illegal tactic if it is used against you. Also, if your rules do not provide for a recess that is determined by the delegates, it would be good to have the rules changed so that the presiding officer cannot recess the convention for nefarious reasons.
The November elections are not so far away. Those sympathetic to the Ron Paul movement in Nevada comprise at least 20 percent of the Republican voters in the state and another large percentage of the party favors a fair convention process. If the party leadership continues to abuse these two factions, as they did by the abrupt halting of the convention, it will surely cost votes in all the races from President on down to state contests. In a close election, these lost votes could be decisive. The party chairperson, Sue Lowden, seems to be highly motivated to deliver a delegation of her own choosing to the national convention, so much so that she was willing to use irregular means to halt the state convention. If she continues that strategy, it will likely have a negative impact on most Republican races in this state. She can still repair some of the damage by not interferring with the work of the delegates to the state convention. It remains to be seen whether she will take a common sense approach or continue to disregard the wishes of the state convention delegates. It should be noted that the convention voted in overwhelming numbers, 752 to 405, to reject the plan proposed by the party leadership. Such a vote cannot be ignored if there is a desire for unity in the party and if there is to be a chance to win the November elections. The opposition party is making great strides in registering large numbers of new voters. This may be a difficult year for Republicans and it could be political suicide for the party leadership to continue the abusive methods that they have been using.