By Edwin Cooney
I was going to insist that the above question was asked of me by Yogi Berra last night as I dreamed about the future of the Republican Party. However, like George Washington “I cannot tell a lie,” I won’t tell you that. Nevertheless, the question remains: does the GOP’s search for a nominee have to be over? History says “of course not.” Wisdom on the other hand may say something else, but too often there’s a hell-of-a-difference between history and wisdom.
The truth is that, even more than law, the rules of a political convention have a lot to say about who is and who isn’t nominated at the convention.
Just a day or two ago, GOP National Chairman Reince Priebus announced that former Utah Congresswomen Enid (Greene) Mickelsen and former Massachusetts National Committeeman Ron Kaufman will cochair the GOP Rules Committee. A rules committee is the body that sets all of the regulations for conducting business at a national political convention. Elected to the House in 1994, the year of the “Contract with America,” Congresswoman Mickelsen served on the House Rules Committee. Ms. Mickelsen served only one term in Congress. She has since served as Chair of the Utah GOP. Mr. Kaufman was described as a junior advisor to recent GOP presidents.
If it can get the delegates’ support, a party rules committee can decide that it takes two thirds rather than a majority of delegate votes to get the party’s presidential nomination. However, changing the rules is an uphill battle as well as a risky political venture.
Still, when they think it is to their advantage, candidates often try and change the rules. As Republicans approached their 1976 convention in Kansas City, Missouri, President Gerald Ford led former California Governor Ronald Reagan for the nomination. In an attempt to attract eastern delegates leaning toward Ford, Reagan announced that he was selecting liberal Pennsylvania Senator Richard Schweiker as his running mate. This was done under the guise of “party reform.” Thus, Reagan forces sought to alter Rule 16B to force President Ford to name his running mate before the nomination. The attempt failed which pretty much solidified President Ford’s grasp on the nomination. (Note: In 1980, not only did Mr. Reagan abandon this “reform,” once he’d secured the nomination, Mr. Reagan toyed with the idea of asking former President Ford to join him on a “dream ticket.” Both men, after a few hours, trashed the idea and George H. W. Bush received Reagan’s offer in his pajamas on the third night of the 1980 Convention in Detroit.)
Democratic candidates have also tried to manipulate the rules to favor certain candidates. In 1972, Senator George McGovern won the June 6th California primary. Under California law, any candidate receiving a majority or plurality vote was the automatic winner of all delegate votes. California law was in violation of the recently adopted reform rules of the convention. Thus, Senator Hubert Humphrey and others tried to take some of McGovern’s delegates back believing that a “winner take all” vote was undemocratic. They sought to enforce the convention rule. However, the vote went against them and Senator McGovern kept all his votes, although it couldn’t save McGovern that November.
Politicians of all stripes invariably struggle between politics and principle. As 2016 Republicans prepare for their upcoming convention, they find themselves facing an uncomfortable reality. They may be about to be led by a man who doesn’t really share either their principles or the manners by which most of them were raised. He may not even share their religious morals or priorities. The only alternative left to “conscience Conservatives” would be to adjust the rules of the likely upcoming Cleveland calamity.
Although they can’t violate state regulations that require delegates to vote for the candidates they were elected to support, there are numerous ways to alter the rules of the convention.
First, delegation leaders can apply the unit rule that requires a majority of a state delegation to vote as one. Thus, if a state has 60 Cruz votes, and, say, 40 Trump votes, they can require implementation of the unit rule and only count the 60 Cruz votes. Second, they can alter rule 40B and insist that the 2016 GOP convention require a two thirds vote to nominate a presidential candidate. The question is, do they dare to follow their principles and deny their nomination to a man who supports passage of a national health care measure, has generally supported freedom of choice over conservative pro life principles, and whose lifestyle flies in the face of many of the evangelical morals which they insist reflect the character that God must bless!
So, do they dare? If they don’t, it may well prove that they’re as soft as Barack Obama, as evasive as “Slick Willie” Clinton and, most of all, as political as Hillary Rodham Clinton! How wise is it to be principled? Should the GOP, as the late great Illinois Republican Senator Everett Dirksen once suggested must happen, “rise above principle for the sake of success”? Will the Republican Party be admired more if it sacrifices a “presumptive nominee” in favor of what it really stands for or must it follow him over a political cliff!
If Yogi’s right and “it ain’t over ’til it’s over,” the GOP may truly be a party of conscience!
I wouldn’t bank on it, however!
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
EDWIN COONEY
No comments:
Post a Comment