Given the profound current economic, social, foreign policy problems, outright corruptions being inflicted on Americans, about which Republicans and others of good will have grave concerns, matters for which conservative proposals exist to prevent, alleviate or correct, one might think a few more platform resolutions establishing the local Republican Party as aware and relevant would find their way into the Scott County platform. Sadly that is not the case unless significant changes are made at the county convention convening. later today.
For the most part the Scott County Platform starts off with some basic statements of principles – which is important as such provides the loadstar — but the resolutions part — the actual platform supposedly reflecting current events is often a reiteration of the statement of principles rather than any actual policy guidance directed at elected officials running under the Republican banner. One can drive a truck through platitudes and vague concepts.
The proposed platform (pre-print), as has others of late, when they touch on an area of concern they offer scant if any explanation or justification, providing no educational value. To be sure platforms are not about writing legislation but a mere glance at actual legislation belies that silly objection.
The proposed platform (pre-print) is the old platform with seven additions and one deletion. The additions are timely with one or two exceptions and are plain, a feature that is not always a virtue unless they are actionable. We have no quarrel other than stylistic with the particular additions. But given what has been visited on this country, what has been exposed as regards the Democrats, the state of the economy and so much more, the proposal is anemic and inadequate.
If the excuse is that not enough emanated from the precinct caucuses it should be understood that nothing prohibits the platform committee from proposing amendments (after soliciting sufficient support as per the rules available to all delegates) if they think there are gaps with regard to important matters.
There are huge gaps by any sentient observation of current events and controversies. Reliance on platitudes as somehow covering the issues is inadequate at best and on some matters not even relevant, and in general shows a lack of relevance and timeliness.
It is clear that matters come and go, that is the nature of platforms as matters can be resolved and become irrelevant. The current proposal recognizes that as a local issue was removed we suppose for that reason.
But how is it that an initial proposed platform two years after the start of the pandemic (scamdemic) does not seriously address any of the pertinent controversies thus guiding the legislature with particular objections? There are easily a half dozen encompassing matters that ought to be addressed on that general subject alone.
Is there nothing to be said about the integrity of the 2020 election?
. . . about critical race theory being actually rooted out in school curriculums (current legislation is inadequate)
. . . about support for parents and transparency in curriculums . . . about transgender indoctrination . . . about supporting anything the legislature has done regarding the issue and sports (support for the Governors tax initiative was deemed appropriate why not in support of protecting male and female sport competition).
Nothing about the January 6 commission . . .
What about the actual performance of some of our elected leaders . . . or is the platform not a “communication of grassroots concerns” (2020 and 2022 platforms) but a cheerleading exercise no matter what they say or do.
What about food security as opposed to ethanol security?
Not one statement about gas prices in the draft proposal — how is that tenable from the committee ?
Does this party support what the FBI and DOJ leadership has done to President Trump?
What about ubiquitous government surveillance?
There are many more matters of key importance right now that voters would like to (or ought to) know where the Republican Party stands. There will never be uniformity but there ought to be leadership.
Proposal
It is our hope that the next platform if only to be tried as an experiment will employ a means so that platform development can take place using readily available online collaboration tools made available to all county convention delegates elected at in-person precinct caucuses allowing them to view proposals emanating from the in-person precinct caucuses.
The appointed platform committee would still be responsible for making recommendations with justifications as it deems appropriate, as it does now, but with the delegates, the body actually responsible for the platform, able to propose amendments to the proposed platform in a far less cumbersome manner. This will serve to enhance elected delegate involvement while providing for a more timely platform covering issues of importance — local, state and national.
The current process does not provide delegates with information as to where to contact their fellow delegates. Delegate status enjoys statutory significance in Iowa and is not intended as an anonymous or confidential body.
I am no social media practitioner but it would seem a membership key or restricted “friend” system might be employed as in various social media platforms, monitored and secured by the platform committee, to allow posting of amendments by elected delegates. Minimum support requirements would still be appropriate prior to posting for consideration by the delegate body. Contact, awareness and interest would be greatly enhanced by such a presumably readily available mechanism.
It would seem that the system could also be adapted to allow pre-approval of the platform by elected delegates prior to the convention with perhaps the addition of a like dislike (yes /no) toggle to each item of the proposed platform. The convention could actually be reduced in length (the supposed bugaboo of many) or allowing more time for hand-clapping regarding the speeches it seems that element thinks is all the delegates are elected to do.
One objection might be that some delegates might not have an online presence — it seems to me the cumbersome burden ought to be on them as the existing mechanism could also be retained. I would recommend that in listing the duties of a delegate that online availability/participation be included as a recommended enhancement of the experience.
Roger Mall, delegate to Scott County Republican Convention
