Dear Political Activist,
Mr. Wes Harris has been critical of my personal support for mayoral candidate Jennifer Wright. This is not the first time Mr. Harris has made an issue of my personal endorsement of a Republican candidate in a primary. In his opinion I am not following the bylaws of the MCRC. I think he is misreading the bylaws. Here are the bylaws I believe Mr. Harris is referring to and my response to his opinions:
ARTICLE VI, Section 5A (a bylaw I had no part in proposing or passing although I agree with it) “No officer or member may claim to speak on behalf of the EGC in support of a candidate in the Republican Primary Elections unless authorized to do so by the advanced approval of 60% of the elected membership of the EGC at a duly constituted meeting.”
This bylaw does not apply because I never claim to be speaking on behalf of the EGC, only myself as an exercise of my first amendment right, and I always emphasize for clarity that the candidate I am supporting may not use my title. I have no access to any Republican email data base and use my own email list of activists who would like to know my recommendations.
Article VI, Section 5B (this bylaw I did propose because Republican PCs were endorsing candidates of the Democrat Party in primary and general elections). “No member of the MCRC shall lend an endorsement to a non-Republican candidate in any election. Should a MCRC member endorse a non-Republican, that MCRC member will lose his voting privileges, including proxies, for the rest of his term.”
Neither does this bylaw apply because Ms. Wright is a Republican.
In a broader sense, this issue of endorsement of candidates stems from a long-standing “ruling class” paradigm in which the Republican officialdom portrays itself as favoring no candidate in the primary, while behind the scenes and sometimes in front, they do everything they can to destroy the grassroots conservative candidate in favor of the incumbent or establishment candidate.
The difference is that I am not using any title although others, without my authorization, may apply a title to me. The ruling class model also allows all elected Republicans to endorse the candidate of any party and to advance legislation that is opposed by the majority of the members of the Republican party. This same paradigm forbids the precinct committeeman from endorsing a candidate or opposing legislation advanced by an elected official such as amnesty for illegal aliens.
You may recall that in the 2010 primary election the ruling class Republicans established as one of the objectives to be adopted by the State AZGOP “Victory Plan” a process to “reelect all current federal officer holders.” You should realize that behind the scenes this is what the ruling class has been doing to put their candidates in office at the expense of the more conservative grassroots candidate.
You have to admit that the RNC has followed this method of operation for decades. I elect to change this pattern in order to point out in rare instances who the grassroots conservative really is and to oppose legislation that is not constitutionally based. If I am mistaken in my impression of the wishes of Constitutional conservatives and Tea Party activists, I expect they will let me know.
But the impression many conservatives have is that one of the reasons for the rise of the Tea Party is the belief that the Republican Ruling Class has been working against the conservative and Constitutionally based platform of the Republican Party and they want to see a different template.
I am attempting to give them this new template and to show them that the Republican Party is not Democrat Light. Those of us who have been elected to leadership positions still have the first amendment right to speak our minds as individuals. We did not lose that right by being elected to leadership. We were elected because we could be trusted to exercise that first amendment right in support of grassroots issues and candidates.