Introduction
This political commentary is written by a person who in the closing weeks of the Republican presidential nomination battle in Iowa chose to caucus for Rick Santorum and became a minor contributor to his campaign. I have many differences with key positions Ron Paul has staked out regarding foreign policy, drug legalization and some other matters. While he was my least favorite candidate in a field of five at the time ( an internal matter of relativity), by my estimation he and his supporters got a raw deal by the leadership of the Scott County Republican Party. However it is important to add at the outset that in talking to supporters of Ron Paul, that just as I pledged to support Ron Paul should he be the nominee, they continue to pledge support for the eventual Republican nominee as well.
This political commentary is focused on fairness issues emanating from delegate selection to district and state Republican conventions revealed at the Scott County Republican convention. However key local Ron Paul organizers have raised issues regarding the validity of the March 10th Scott County Republican Convention. Those objections involve basic parliamentary matters that it is maintained were not adhered to.
In my estimation, an important background aspect to this charge is that unquestionably the Chairwoman of Scott County Republicans Judy Davidson was aware of a high level of concern by Ron Paul supporters in the weeks leading up to the convention. Ron Paul’s local leadership maintain their concerns were triggered by an uncooperative approach taken by Chairwoman Davidson toward their legitimate requests.
In spite of the importance to pay heed to basic parliamentary procedures in the most friendly of large business meetings, regardless of pending controversy, Chairwoman Davidson who was also unquestionably aware that Ron Paul supporters were proponents of adherence to parliamentary procedure, should have been well prepared to conduct the meeting accordingly and with adherence to a published agenda consistent with the rules of conduct for such a meeting. Her lapses were evident March 10th.
I tend to be more forgiving, arguably lax, regarding such matters, but any responsible person would be well advised, given the circumstances, to prepare and operate on a heightened degree of parliamentary assiduousness. In spite of a bureaucratic reputation, Madame Chairwoman failed on some significant matters as the putative leader of the Scott County Convention. How significant I have not taken the time to analyze because my primary concern herein is the issue of unfairness exhibited toward Ron Paul delegates leading up to the convention.
Given the unnecessary level of distrust that Chairwoman Davidson and her confidants managed to engender in the lead up to the convention, I fully understand the decision of local Ron Paul organizers to call such matters to task and to propose a reconvening of the Scott County Convention March 23rd to properly pursue the orders of the day March 10th. While I do not know what the efficacy of such an undertaking will be,* in part because of the confusion surrounding the call and the difficulties in achieving quorum, I am not overly impressed with the existence of a letter from the newly ordained RPI Chairman A.J. Spiker, himself a Ron Paul supporter, which seeks to quash the attempt to reconvene the Scott County Convention and validate the March 10th County Convention.
I would be more reticent about a reconvened meeting had Chairman Spiker included relevant responses to all the issues raised by complainants. His response may be controlling but his reliance on counsel I presume was available to guide the Polk County Convention fiasco (see write-ups in The Iowa Republican) is not inspiring. In that situation, were Ron Paul adherents in the wrong, they should be called to task. I do not see that as the situation here.
As a prelude to this commentary a written questionnaire asking questions relevant to the level of cooperation received from Scott County Republican official operatives was asked of the Ron Paul organizers and was also submitted by me, as a Scott County Republican Central Committee member, to Chairwoman Davidson via e-mail. I received an e-mail response from Michael Elliott, Ron Paul Co-Chair, but my request for a an e-mail or other written response to those questions has not been honored by Scott County Chairwoman Davidson.
* Approximately 65 Scott County Republicans met Thursday evening March 22nd, to try to reconvene the Scott County Republican Convention. A quorum was not achieved so the meeting turned to discussion of organizational and other topics. I attended the meeting offering my services as a delegate and as an expression of my objection to the exhibition of unfairness and poor leadership visited on Ron Paul delegates by leaders of Scott County Republicans.
The Raw Deal: Ron Paul Delegates
The results of the presidential preference poll at the 2012 Scott County Precinct Caucuses were as follows:: of the 5943 votes cast, Romney received 33.7%; Santorum 24.3%; Paul 19.7%; Gingrich 14%; Perry 4.7%; Bachmann 2.8%; Huntsman .8%.
Let’s say you are a Ron Paul supporter and you see that you and your compatriots achieved nearly 20% of the vote at the Scott County Republican Caucuses. Now let’s say that during the meat of the evening (not as is popularly mistaken, the presidential preference poll) the process that results in delegate selection to the County Convention, the prelude to district state and national conventions, that Ron Paul supporters were more likely to volunteer to be delegates for the convention process. The result being that their delegate strength instead of being roughly 20%, was 30% or more.
Keep in mind that for most presidential preference camps at the Scott County precinct caucuses this year, it was not a time of slates, jostling, combining or black listing of potential delegates, which is always possible when it comes to picking delegates in Iowa Republican caucuses. Such activity has not been seen locally to any great extent since 1988.
In the years since 1988, a number of factors intervened to lessen the fervor for such tactics. Conservatives were no longer the insurgents, the party had shifted to be more reliably conservative, placing moderates and liberals at conventions into the minority at a ratio of perhaps of 2 to 1. Because of incumbency, an heir apparent to the presidential nomination was clear in ’92 and ’04. In other years, based on the competition and looking forward, concern about Iowa’s relatively limited number of national convention delegates was just not high. Campaign operatives were happy to “win” at Iowa’s non-binding preference poll and just move on.
The only foul with respect to any of this is the utter lack of emphasis placed on delegate selection by the other presidential preference camps. The Ron Paul supporters were more concerned with the long game. There was a general aura of good feeling at the caucuses, including among and toward Ron Paul supporters that evening. Throw in the usual quota of laziness and indifference and all of this combined to allow the Ron Paul preference camp to exceed delegate strength to the Scott County Convention compared to their county wide presidential preference strength.
True, Ron Paul supporters probably did not by and large identify themselves as such, except maybe among themselves, but then, 1) most others did not identify their preference as part of the delegate selection “process,” 2) people could have asked, and 3) others could have vied for the position. I dare say in most precincts the delegate process was not contested, it was more an effort to find enough people, Paul supporters or otherwise, to stand and be willing to give up a weekend afternoon at the scheduled county convention March 10th .
The results of their efforts . . . preempted primarily by the maneuvering of the Scott County Republican Chairwoman Judy Davidson’s appointed District and State Convention Nominating Committee . . . was, according to Michael Elliott, Co-Chair of the local Ron Paul effort, . . . perhaps five or so Ron Paul supporters nominated as delegates** to the district and state conventions instead of the dozens a fairer treatment would have afforded them. The Judy Davidson select nominating committee, which included herself as an active participant, included several known Romney supporters from the 2008 caucuses and at least one prominent Romney political consultant, Brian Kennedy of Woodberry Associates. There were no Ron Paul supporters on the committee according to Elliott. We will comment further on the staffing of this committee and its activities in Part II. For the record, the author of this political commentary was a Romney supporter in the 2008 caucuses.
** At the time this was first posted, Chairman Davidson had not supplied her Nominating Committee’s list of proposed (later elected) delegates or alternates to Central Committee member’s in response to requests that came before, during and soon after the county convention. I am informed that now nearly two weeks after the county convention Michael Elliott, the co-chair of the local Ron Paul effort, has been e-mailed the requested lists. That delay in itself is unconscionable no matter what. His evaluation indicates that there may be ten Ron Paul supporters on the list of delegates. Delegates, in the Davidson aggravated atmosphere of “us or them,” are crucial to fair representation of presidential preferences leading up to subsequent conventions.
The apparent final tally puts Ron Paul strength at approximately 8% of delegates when the unity conducive integrity approach would call for 20% to 30% or two and one-half to three and one half times as many delegates. Was it shame that kept the list from being released? An analysis of the alternate list will be forthcoming in these pages but that is back of the bus territory as one must make a decision to make a day long event and incur transportation costs not knowing if one will be seated, the protocols being clumsy as well. In no way can these be justified on a combined basis. No preference camp organizers worth their stripes should be expected to go gently into the night on such a basis.
Fairness and Leadership are the Issues
Nothing in the rules of the Iowa Republican Party requires delegates and alternates to the county, district and state conventions to reflect precinct caucus presidential preference participation. However the Republican National Committee has through various rule changes been moving states toward so called proportional representation. But while such proportional representation is not a requirement by rule at any level in Iowa Republican politics, the influence of leadership and their good judgment in pursuit of unity so often called for in words, should be evident in deeds as well. It has not been in 2012.
Indeed, by appearances to this observer, the pursuit of unity on the part of leadership was so sorely lacking and good judgement so bereft that more reasons exist for Judy Davidson to resign as Chairwoman of Scott County Republicans than we are aware of that existed for Matt Strawn to resign as Chairman of the Republican Party of Iowa. Pressure for Strawn’s resignation arose from the appearance of unfair manipulation, marginally disadvantageous to Rick Santorum, in the announcement of the winner of the extremely close January precinct caucus results between Romney and Santorum.
The regrettable treatment Ron Paul supporters received on Scott County Republican Chairwoman Judy Davidson’s watch appears far more concerted to this observer than any allegations regarding the treatment of my candidate Rick Santorum by RPI Chairman Matt Strawn. With no rule to inhibit her, Chairwoman Davidson used her power (the power to at least avoid untoward appearances) in a manner that we believe any objective observer would predict to cause disunity. While she had the support of most of the marbles (delegates) in terms of support for her agenda, Ron Paul supporters appear to have been treated by her and her close associates as a personal threat rather than allies in the battle against the Obamanation. “If the Ron Paul people win they will ‘get rid’ of Judy,” was heard and reported to me by several people. Chairwoman Davidson has managed to appear to this observer as a child preventing others from having any marbles.
Coming in Part Two —
More commentary regarding the delegate process.
The appearance of a stacked deck.
The lack of cooperation toward legitimate requests.
Questions: Is there more to the personal agenda than Scott County?
Unity indeed, and new blood.
What should have been done.
