To Endorse, Or Not To Endorse, Wait Can We? ….. YES!
Posted by Andy on February 20th, 2008
Earhardt and Tinglestad are hell bent on the $8.4 billion transit tax passing, dispite teh veto. Please keep sending them messages and calling them.One other little thing that has fluttered down to me and I suppose I will post it because I want to make sure principled conservatives in the Republican rank and file do have the power to hold wayward Republicans accountable.
The Republican Party of Minnesota’s Constitution has a provision in it about not endorsing at an endorsing convention.
Section 3 Endorsements; A. General Rules;
4. A motion of no endorsement may be adopted by a majority vote. The rules of a convention may limit how often or when such a motion may be made. However on any round of voting for endorsement, a motion of no endorsement shall be considered adopted if a majority of the ballots (excluding blanks) or a majority of the votes on a voice vote (excluding abstentions) is for ‘no’, ‘none’, or ‘no endorsement’.
So if you live in Tinglestad’s or Erhardt’s (Or anyone who has voted in a way that merits) Districts and they are running unopposed, you have the parliamentary ability to not endorse them, even if the Convention Chair tries to railroad the process.
It may be time for the MNGOP to reevaluate our Republican Convention Calendar now that we are endorsing Legislative candidates during session and before all their votes have taken place. Maybe we should consider having a larger gap between Caucus and the BPOU conventions. (as a BPOU Chair I say YES, please gOD more time!) But in the true spirit of have all the information available to make the right decision to endorse, the session needs to be over, and all their votes need to be gone over.
Here’s the point to this rambling. You can hold your endorsement for the Republicans like Erhardt and Tinglestad over their heads on this Transit Tax override vote. I would recommend that they not be endorsed before they have cast a vote on the $8.4 Billion transit tax increase. Look, Erhardt is an author, he’s not going to deserve to get the endorsement in my principled opinion, and Tinglestad is right there with him ready to override the veto, dito for her.
If you don’t have your Republican Legislators “sworn word” or pledge that they will sustain the veto before your endorsement vote, don’t endorse them. You can always take care of the other convention business that day, and then hold another special endorsing convention after the session so Delegates can have the full knowledge of just how their Legislator sided with Democrats to raise taxes $8.4 Billion.
But that is up to those of you in those Districts. I’m not telling you what to do. I am telling you what I would do. I am providing those of you out there with this information so that you can stop these types of (R)epublicans from running away with an endorsement they may not deserve, as well as send a shot across the bow of anyone who thinks they can vote for the $8.4 Billion tax increase, but then sustain the veto and save face back home.
Don’t let them take advantage of you. if that bill passes with 47 votes against, the Democrats won’t even bother trying to override. Kill the bill as quickly as possible.
You will need to organize a majority vote to not endorse in your own Districts, should you have a Republican who needs to be held accountable.
Sphere: Related Content
February 20th, 2008 at 5:28 pm
I think endorsements are overrated. Really. I think if candidates are serious, they would fight all the way to the primary.
February 21st, 2008 at 8:55 am
Actually, the best service a BPOU chair can perform is to MAKE the endorsement tantamount to victory. If all you are going to do is endorse and hand the candidate a check for $500, your whole convention full of delegates and duly seated alternates can be “outvoted” by the first liberal PAC that comes down the pike.
The other thing you forget is that it is very difficult to beat somebody with nobody. If you don’t like the Repbulican you have, for Pete’s sake find a better one! A challenge for the endorsement is a heck of a lot more “convincing” than some meaningless “no endorsement” vote, especially against an incumbent.
February 21st, 2008 at 9:24 am
Good points, but this is basically the one chance Republican grassroots activists have to hold people accountable. Most politicians think they can walk on water and take such things for granted. I think Dick Day is a great example. He’s been sent to St. paul over and over so he thought he was really a conservative. (Man his letter he sent out this week…. I had to keep looking at the name on the envelope to see who was really sending it) When all of a sudden he faced other Delegates and realized they weren’t as enamored with him as he is, he decided the endorsement process is broke. Something a lot of moderates and liberal (R)s seem to share.
Anyways, I don’t disagree that you need a better candidate, but if you can’t find one, or one is being held back for some reason, then the only thing a convention can do is not endorse if they truly do have problems with the votes and policies of their guy or gal.
My main point of this is that in some of these Districts, like Erhardt, Tinglestad, Peterson’s, etc etc is that maybe if they knew that their vote on the Transit Tax veto override could cost them their endorsement, maybe, just maybe they would think twice before voting for an $8 billion dollar tax increase.
In the end it is up to the District, if they are happy being represented by a tax increasing freedom squashing…. (R) then so be it. But they do have the power to do something about it. A candidate of either party can run for office with out endorsement. If they are so popular, maybe they don’t need the party to get reelected.
Maybe if a few BPOUs where these (R)s call home end a few messages to them that they will have to get themselves reelected and can’t take the conservative base for granted, who knows, maybe they won’t.
I know this is radical thought to some, but if we don’t change the status quo don’t make waves process of the party, guess what, NOTHING WILL CHANGE! Losses will continue and more terrible Legislation will continue to be proposed and supported by (R)s. That’s not a winning proposition for the conservative movement.