The Executive Committee of the Republican Party of Manitowoc County has been discussing that they wish to change the Party's constitution. On June 2nd, a Special Call to Caucus was announced to discuss and possibly vote on these changes, with discussion occurring "briefly" at the next monthly meeting (June 11th, 6:30PM in Balkansky Room BC of the Manitowoc Public Library).
After reviewing the proposed changes, I have concerns, and I will begin with the most prominent.
Membership Termination
With the new Membership Termination section and using Article III, Section 1, Objectives A & B as their reasoning, it is possible for the Executive Committee to expel patriots.
Article III (Membership), Section 1 (Members), Objectives A & B state:
Membership in the organization shall only be open to Manitowoc County residents of voting age who are eligible to vote in any national, state, or county election and who believe in the following objectives:
A. To preserve and advance fundamental Republican principles and policies.
B. To maintain control of the Republican Party of ㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤManitowoc County in the hands of grassroots Republicans.
The problem with Objectives A and B is their ambiguity.
With Objective A, what could be defined as Republican principles and policies by one person could be different to another. Does the Executive Committee define what Republican principles and policies are? Does the RPW? One member of the party could support a policy while another member opposes it. Which belief is considered the fundamental Republican principle and policy? If the Executive Committee supports a policy but a member doesn't, is the member going against this constitution?
With Objective B, what does it mean to "maintain control" of the party? What does losing control look like? Is it subjective to the leadership? If someone speaks up at a meeting and their thoughts are different than a member of the Executive Committee, could that be cited as the party losing control? On top of that, with the objective adding "in the hands of grassroots Republicans," if someone does not have time to be involved in the activities of the party, is uncomfortable with grassroots activities, or chooses not to participate in party events, are they not allowed to be a member?
Article VI (Ambiguity), A states:
In the event of any conflict or ambiguity of this Constitution or with By-Laws adopted hereunder, the Constitution of the Republican Party of Wisconsin shall prevail.
The RPW Constitution has both of those objectives verbatim, does not explain what they mean, and does not have an article on ambiguity. It is possible that the County Party Executive Committee may refer this to the state party if they want support. This is the same state GOP that is constantly fighting patriots so they do not take over. That is what is meant by maintain control.
Article III, Section 4 (Membership Termination) includes this statement:
Membership may be involuntarily terminated by a two-thirds majority vote of a quorum of the Executive Committee with appropriate notice. A person whose membership has been
terminated by vote of the Executive Committee may appeal that action to a Meeting of the Membership.
Add these two sections together and you create a formula for the Executive Committee to expel anyone they disagree with. In fact, the Membership Termination article allows the Executive Committee to terminate a membership for any reason at all, keeping them from voting on party matters, serving as an officer, attending the state convention and district caucus as a delegate, and other rights you have as a paying member.
Let's say that happens and the members do vote to reinstate a membership. There is nothing stating the Executive Committee couldn't remove the membership once more. There is also no guarantee the members will reinstate a membership. Some members may not vote to reinstate a membership, even if they want to, in order to appear on the good side of the Executive Committee, and not have their membership be next on the chopping block.
Nominating Committee
Article IV (Organization), Section 2 (Officers), B (Nomination of Candidates for Offices) states:
The Chair shall appoint a Nominating Committee of no less than three individuals from among the members of the organization and these appointments shall be confirmed by the Executive Committee at least sixty days prior to a scheduled election. The Nominating Committee shall receive applications from Members for each Officer position to be elected and, after their consideration, report to the Executive Committee the name(s) of one or more nominees for each office to be filled. This report must be submitted to the Executive Committee at least thirty days prior to the scheduled election. The Executive Committee must accept or modify the list of nominees and distribute the final list to the Members at least fourteen days prior to the scheduled election.
While this is also listed in the RPMC's current constitution, this should be eliminated altogether. What the Nominating Committee ends up doing is picking favorites for the Executive Committee, and especially the Chair, being the one appointing and recommending for their approval to serve on this committee in the first place. They present their "recommended" candidates to the membership, providing them with an unfair advantage, and with this version, the members would now have a two weeks notice of who they "should" vote for. Instead, we should stick with nominations on the floor on the day of the Caucus, with no recommendations from the party, giving everyone an equal playing field.
Are There Positives?
Not all proposed changes to the RPMC constitution are negative. I am in support of adding Standing Committees to the party. Currently, the RPMC Executive Committee consists of a Chair, Vice Chair, Treasurer, and Secretary. Other county parties have more officers, allowing more to be accomplished. As long as the officer fulfills his/her duties, this would be a welcomed addition.
With everything that's been said, members of the party are not obligated to change the constitution. They should not vote to pass it if they disagree in fear of what the Executive Committee may do if these changes pass and they vote against. The Executive Committee also does not need to engage in rapidly changing the operations of the party. As long as the negatives are included, these proposed changes should be rejected.
Brayden Myer, Founder
Manitowoc County Patriots
Current RPMC Constitution
Proposed RPMC Constitution Draft
