Resolution to ban “Winner take all”…

Think this will fly???

Just sent this out to a few Chairs, and posted it on FB…bring on the comments…


Resolution on the restoration of apportioned convention delegates for the 2016 Republican National Convention

Whereas the State Rules Committee, after to 2012 Presidential primary election, did amend the rules of the Michigan Republican Party to award all Republican National Convention delegates to Mitt Romney over the protests of the party members;

Whereas this decision did cause and effect a change in the 2012 Presidential campaign due to the favoring of one candidate over another;

Whereas a significant portion of the Michigan Republican Party and 2012 Presidential primary voters were summarily ignored as a direct result of this decision; and

Whereas “winner take all” Presidential primaries affect candidate campaign strategies to the detriment of lesser financially viable candidates, thus stifling serious debate; now therefore be it

1. Resolved, that the Michigan Republican Party (MIGOP):

1. adopt a rule establishing the State Presidential primary contingent of Republican National Convention delegates as apportioned by county result;

2. establish such rule by floor vote of 50% plus one of the delegates to the February 20th, 2015 State convention, effective immediately upon approval of said delegates;

3. require a two-thirds majority of a full State convention to revoke apportioned national Presidential delegates.

So moved by:_____________________________________

Supported by:_____________________________________

Supported by:_____________________________________

Adopted by majority vote, this ______ day of _______________________, 2015

___________________County Republican Party

You Betcha! (8)Nuh Uh.(2)

  1 comment for “Resolution to ban “Winner take all”…

  1. Kevin Rex Heine
    February 1, 2015 at 11:42 pm

    So, Tom, here are my thoughts:

    First, apparently, according to RNC Rule 17(a), as quoted by The Green Papers, holding our presidential preference primary on the first-quarter day reserved in Michigan Election Law, Section 168.641(1-a) (the fourth Tuesday in February), we apparently don’t face any penalty. If so, that’s a good thing, as it means that we don’t need to schedule an actual special election for the purpose of avoiding getting our national convention delegation nuked (unless the Michigan Republican Party is serious about coordinating a Great Lakes Super Primary).

    Second, to your proposed resolution, specifically point 1 (emphasis added):

    … delegates as apportioned by county result …

    Uh . . . no! Absolutely not! This is a s----d f-----g idea!!!

    As to why, consider that both the Electoral College and the RNC Membership in Convention (baseline delegation) are determined according to congressional apportionment. Counties have nothing to do with how the Electoral College is resolved, nor anything to do with the baseline delegation allotment.

    Quite frankly, the dichotomy you present of “winner take all” vs. “strict proportionality” is a false one, as there are other options. Both of the hybrid options allow for the three district delegates to be decided according to the result of the popular vote in the district (plurality wins); the difference is in how the at-large delegates are decided.

    Counties come into play only in those displays that the National Popular Vote advocates love to use to advance their end-run around Article II § 1 Clause 3 of the U. S. Constitution (as modified by Amendment XII). Do you really want to play into their hands?

    I detailed this a bit in an opinion article that I wrote back in September, in which I agreed with the basic premise of the hybrid-proportional method of delegate allocation, including requiring a 15% threshold of the statewide popular vote to be awarded any of the at-large delegates, but disagreed with the “simple majority” threshold for triggering “winner-take-all statewide” (it was 60% back in 2012, and I recommended 75% in the article).

    Change “county” to “district” in your resolution proposal, and I think it’d work.

    Also, right now, the process to be placed on the presidential primary ballot is for one to have duly filed with the FEC as a major-party candidate, and then to notify the Michigan Secretary of State via official campaign letterhead. I think that ought to change to a nominating petition process, with a signature requirement consistent with that required of a candidate for Governor or U. S. Senator (MCL 168.544f specifies the requirements, though you'll find it easier to read the printer friendly PDF version). This keeps the "fly by night" candidates off of the ballot, and also forces the candidates to demonstrate some grassroots support for their efforts.

    You Betcha! (0)Nuh Uh.(0)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *