Just in case the recipient doesn’t get their e-mail, I’m reprinting it here. Those interested should also make their local Central Committee members aware that you have a vested interest in the adoption of this proposal.
To my fellow Central Committee members:
On Saturday, you will be asked to consider a change to our bylaws. Obviously our last get-together was full of acrimony and angst over a proposed revamping of the document and voting system just a few years after we had done this exercise to modernize and streamline it. So you may have received this news and said, “oh no, not again.”
Well, this time it’s different. Rather than cosmetic changes or creating committees out of whole cloth, the proposal co-authored by Heather Olsen and I has two very simple purposes: one, to strengthen the neutrality section of the bylaws by placing it in its own article; and two, to prevent the Rule 11 fiasco of 2010 from being repeated.
It’s our belief that the party should not be putting its finger on the scale in a contested primary situation. The paragraph on neutrality (5.4) already in the bylaws didn’t seem very strong as it was buried among other items, so this proposal moves it to lead the new Article 7. That’s probably not very controversial.
The more contentious aspect of our proposal is where we require our representatives to the national Republican Party to get permission from the state’s Central Committee before asking for a waiver of Rule 11, as they asked the national party in 2010 for Bob Ehrlich and Andy Harris. Both were in contested primaries at the time. The timing of the deal is what rankled me and inspired the creation of this proposal, since there was ample opportunity to bring this piece of business before the 2010 Spring Convention in Ocean City; however, the Chair at that time chose not to. Doing business behind closed doors is what we associate with the other party!
We originally made this proposal before the Spring 2011 convention in Ocean City, but the unfortunate aspect of a strict time limit meant a lot of business – including this particular bylaw change and many others proposed – went unfinished. However, this is the only bylaw change I’m aware of going before this convention.
In the meantime, Heather and I discussed the proposal more based on feedback we both received. In addition to integrating the neutrality aspect in general, we also decided to lower the threshold for waiving this prohibition from a 3 / 4 to a 2 / 3 majority and added the option of having the counties vote on it separately when the situation dictates, at the discretion of the Chair.
There has been more recent feedback concerning the voting method in the proposal, which was written as a “one man, one vote” balloting. This was my idea, and the reason I decided to do it this way was to balance the two situations: if a vote is taken in a non-convention setting, I reckoned it would be tallied as one man, one vote so I thought the two scenarios should be equal. But I’m willing to allow a change to the standard weighted convention voting (if a vote is held there) if it helps to pass the measure through.
I believe the time has come to end the politics of the proverbial smoke-filled room and allow the candidates the most level playing field possible to get their message out to the voters. The Maryland Republican Party must have a extremely good reason to take a stance during the primary season, and perceived electability is not good enough.
It’s time to take a stand for good government, and not politics as usual.
Michael Swartz
Secretary
Wicomico County Republican Central Committee