Posted on 06/04/2008 7:51:35 PM PDT by traviskicks
Republican activists' Houston case warned state leaders will try to shut out grass-roots opposition at meeting next week
A Harris County judge on Wednesday ordered the Texas Republican Party to comply with state election law at its state convention in Houston next week after Republican activists alleged that the party illegally uses procedures to minimize grass-root dissent.
Visiting Judge Tom Sullivan issued the temporary restraining order on Wednesday, a few hours after it was requested in a lawsuit filed by activists across the state.
Represented by lawyer Gary Polland, a former Harris County Republican Party chairman, the group alleges that party leaders violated procedural laws at past conventions and plan to do so again. The next hearing on the case is scheduled for Monday.
Texas law says a political party's state convention must choose a permanent chairman before doing most official business. Polland and Wharton County GOP Chairwoman Debra Medina said the party instead elects a permanent chairman late in the convention, shutting off dissent beforehand about the selection of convention delegates and new state party leaders, the adoption of a platform and other actions.
"If they want to exclude the grass roots and control the process it's not right," Polland said.
Medina worked in the primary re-election campaign of her congressman, Ron Paul. The activists she heads call themselves "Goldwater Conservatives, Reagan Republicans, Robertson Crowd, Ron Paul Republicans, and, well, real Conservatives" on their Web site, www.fairconvention.org.
Texas Republican Party spokesman Hans Klingler said the party follows the rules and is willing to address complaints about how the convention is conducted.
"We are a rule-of-law party," he said.
The state convention at the downtown George R. Brown Convention Center will select delegates to the Republican National Convention and hear speeches by top GOP elected officials. Some Republicans in Galveston, Nueces and Parker counties want the convention to block the seating of delegates from those areas on grounds that they were selected in violation of party rules.
Without changing the way the convention is run, Polland said, the party risks alienating some of its grassroots supporters, "and 10 or 15 percent disaffected Republican voters means (Democrat) Barack Obama wins Texas."
Polland and Medina are convention delegates.
Baloney, SecAmndmt, the whole lawsuit is a power play, not a move that’s “grassroots conservative and constitutionalist.” There’s a difference in definitions of the words in the law and a desire to subvert by lawsuit rather than resolutions and process, that’s all.
Why not put forward a resolution at the rules or platform committee? Why cost the Party money through a lawsuit, why call “the establishment” “Tories,” unless you are disruptive?
Have you read the platform of the Republican Party of Texas? Who do you think wrote that platform? Where do you come off calling names?
As I asked earlier, exactly how will voting for the chair at the first session empower the “grassroots conservative and constitutionalist” more than holding the votes to Friday morning? I told you how it will cost each of the delegates and alternates.
I predict that the lawsuit will end the fussing that we’ve been having over which wing - which group of would-be leaders - of the Party will lead. When our Delegates hear about it, they/we will vote down the disrupters at the first chance we get. I, for one, will be at the microphone to speak against any candidates put forward by Medina, Polland and their cohorts.
Hear Hear!
(I’m trying to sound like a Tory.^)
well, I was responding more to that other poster who started off the thread by calling ron paul supporters ‘a-holes’. So the ‘country club’ comment was more directed at him. I am a republican, and have been for some 5 years. I was a poll watcher in north carolina in 2004 and volunteered for the orange county republican candidates that year. Since then, no doubt, my views have become more libertarian and I’ve been supporting Ron Paul out here in NV quite strongly.
I think, unfortunately, Ron Paul supporters often unecessarily create conflict with the Republican party establishment. They view them suspiciously and assign intentions when most state republican leadership actually wants to welcome them to the party and otherwise just wants to hold events in timely and professional manners. Not all Ron supporters are like this, many if not most are established republicans, some of whom are already part of the party leadership. Occasionally RP supporters have good reason to direct angst at party leadership. Which was the case here in Texas, I don’t know; since they got a judge to agree with them, sounds like the latter.
But the truth is that in many cases political conventions and party meetings are social clubs, people see old friends and make new friends and sort of forget about the purpose of it all, become ideologically complacent. The Ron Paul supporters are lighting a fire under the GOP. I think the best would be if we need to work together to advance liberty and the Republican party (the two used to be synonymous).
Apparently you didn’t bother to read for comprehension. The 2008 Primary favored RP and was a tough hill for an inexperienced campaigner Peden, who still garnered a significant number of votes. Voters in the 2010 Primary will remember RP’s supporters shenanigans at the County and State (and potentially at the National) conventions and they will hold him accountable.
My guess is that RP won’t even run in 2010 and will attempt to anoint an heir apparent to succeed him (if it is who I suspect, that candidate will be trounced when word gets out about his role in all of this.)
Polland has been lusting over higher office for some time, but this will sink his dreams. those who previously respected him, will see him as a RP toady and shun him.
Did anyone think that the RPT must function under the 2006 Platform and Rules?
The Chair, etc., can’t change rules passed by the Party.
I know that our County delegates and alternates are usually the most organized in our SD and CD. However, we do count on getting all our ducks in a row at the SD Caucus, rather than at the First General Session.
I highly recommend reading our Platform, available by link on this page:
http://www.texasgop.org/site/PageServer?pagename=library_home
In light of the fact that Paul took 70% of the Republican vote against Peden, AND in light of the national exposure that Paul's views got, it would appear that quite a few of those Paul supporters are from his own district. Your observation is mere "wishful thinking" which does not have a basis in reality.
Paul MAY give up his seat, he's not young, but it is highly unrealistic to believe that the Republican establishment is going to be able to remove him from that seat.
My guess is that RP won’t even run in 2010 and will attempt to anoint an heir apparent to succeed him (if it is who I suspect, that candidate will be trounced when word gets out about his role in all of this.)
Perhaps, perhaps not. i don't have any insights into his plans. Unless Paul states them, this is just more guess work posing as analysis.
Polland has been lusting over higher office for some time, but this will sink his dreams. those who previously respected him, will see him as a RP toady and shun him.
As a Libertarian Party member (who did NOT change registration to vote for Paul in my state's closed primary), i know nothing of Polland, and really don't care. You may be right, or making yet another guess.
Baloney? It isn’t just RP supporters who have witnessed some of the power plays by the local R party establishment. As I posted in other threads, a friend (Huckabee supporter) who has been active in the Texas R party for years watched the local county chair break the rules several times in order to prevent decent conservative resolutions (eg getting rid of the income tax) from being brought up by RP delegates and others. Conservatives should be leaders in supporting principles and rules. Republicans who defend or justify rule-breaking in order to protect the party establishment are not conservatives.
You obviously have heard a lot of stories, but haven’t given any real specifics. (Who, where, when?)
Nor have you read the Platform. http://www.texasgop.org/site/DocServer/2006_Plat_with_TOC_2.pdf?docID=2022
The Republican Party of Texas Platform already calls for the end of the income tax and the repeal of the 16th Amendment. See the top of page 24.
“Nor have you read the Platform.”
Not true, and not relevant to the issue at hand.
Of course the Platform is relevant. Why put forward a resolution to end the IRS and income tax, when it’s already in there?
Has the 2008 RPT platform been written yet?
It doesn’t even matter, because the platform is NOT relevant to the subject of this thread.
Your anecdote was that you knew someone who knew someone who couldn’t get a resolution heard. The purpose of resolutions is to amend or build the platform. The Platform Committee works from the last version and first resolution each convention I’ve attended is to adopt the Platform as amended by the Committee.
I know that our local Resolutions Committee’s first recommendation was to adopt and affirm the 2006 Platform. We had a couple of people complain that their resolution wasn’t being heard. We pointed to the same wording in the Platform that had just been affirmed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.