Recommendations for Proposed C&B Amendments and Resolutions

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

The following are Proposals that are on the Utah State Republican Organizing Convention Agenda Saturday, May 18, 2013.

The following positions on these proposals are recommended, however the floor debate may alter these recommendations.  Please feel free to print a copy to take with you to the convention by clicking on the “print” button.

Caucus/Convention Constitution and Resolution Proposals

Proposal #1-005-C – NO
Caucus Procedures

Submitted by James Evans, 801.949.0955
This could give the State Central Committee (SCC) unusual power and authority to make changes to the caucus rules.

Resolution #2-017-C – NO
Supporting Ongoing Caucus/Convention Improvements
Submitted by Michelle Scharf (801.499.2095)
Although this is a resolution and not an amendment to the Constitution, it implies that these changes may be made and again gives the SCC too much power to change the rules.  While some of these recommendations may be beneficial, others may now.

In addition, this resolution was not submitted with the permission of the delegate that originally drafted and submitted it to the SCC.

Proposal #3-017-C  – NO
2/3 Threshold

Submitted by Enid Mickelsen, 801.520.0166.
This threshold would throw the election process out of balance sending candidates to contentious and costly run-offs nearly 70% of the time, as opposed to the current balance of going to a primary just over 50% of the time.

Unwarranted scare tactics have been used to promote this threshold.  A worthy threshold does not need scare tactics in order to be established.

The 60% threshold provides balance.  We’ve learned from sad experience that higher thresholds only help Democrats, not Republicans.

Former State Representative Fred Cox has written an excellent Op Ed piece that is worth your time to read. Support the 60%.  It Works!

Proposal #4-040-C – NO
70% Threshold

Submitted by Nancy Lord, 801.688.4769
This Proposal was not submitted to the SCC and therefore has no recommendation.   A similar 70% threshold proposal was originally submitted by James Evans to the SCC but it failed to get 2/3.  This 70% threshold has been tried and tested and has been found to be even more damaging than the 2/3 proposal would be.

We have learned by sad experience that 70% throws the elections out of balance with so many candidates going to contentious primaries that Democrats Bill Orton and Jim Matheson were elected out of disgust for Republicans fighting with each other.

Again, read Fred Cox’s Op Ed.  Support 60%.  It Works!

Constitution and Bylaws Amendment Proposals

Proposal #1 (also listed as #5) – 2013-016-C – NO
Caucus Procedures
Submitted by Clair Ellis, 801.757.7797.
Contrary to the proposal’s intent, it actually disrupts the uniform and fair delegate allocation system by relative Republican strength and makes the election process unfair by stripping some precincts from delegate representation.

Proposal #2 (also listed as #6): 2012-007-B – YES
State Central Committee Roll Call Vote
Submitted by Arnold Gaunt, 801.452.1579.
This proposal would require roll call votes of SCC members and will make that committee more transparent and accountable. I serve on the State Central Committee, and I strongly support this measure.

Proposal #3 (also listed as #7): 2013-040-C. YES, only with several amendment changes
Constitution and Bylaw Amendment Qualifications
Submitted by Nancy Lord, 801.688.4769
This proposal seeks to create fairness in the C&B amendment process allowing amendments to come forward for a vote by several processes:  the C&B committee, the SCC and by delegates, if enough and a broad representation endorse.
However, it stipulates that the amendments and proposals must be included in the call which is mailed.  Delegates must be able to access and review proposals before the convention and within the call deadlines, but the party should be given the option to post these agenda items online to avoid a costly postal mailing.
In addition, it puts an unreasonable restriction on the number of amendments a delegate may endorse.  That becomes problematic in the event that subsequent amendments may need to be proposed and would prevent those endorsers from participating in the ongoing deliberations.
The present language dealing with validating endorsers needs to be omitted and replaced with language that calls for certification of endorsing delegates by matching them with the delegate list.
Proposal #4 (also listed as #8): 2013-028-C. YES, with amendment
Delegate Replacement Authority
Submitted by Arnold Gaunt, 801.452.1579.
If a delegate dies or moves, it is best for an alternate to take the place of that delegate, as is proposed in Lisa Shepherd’s Proposal #6 below. This proposal might be aligned with hers.

Caucus Preference Voting for Multiple Ballots
Submitted by John Hohlbauch, 801-289-6210.
In 2012, a set of confusing voting procedures were established.  This sets forth two voting procedures that may be selected.

Standard Roberts Rules of Order voting rules ought to be maintained.  RONR should not be set aside for elections in caucuses or conventions.  The caucus voting procedures were very confusing in 2012 because RONR was set aside during the proceedings.

Proposal #6 (also listed as #10): 2013-002-C.- YES
Alternate Delegate Selection
Submitted by Lisa Shepherd, 801.373.4128.
This proposal allows alternates to be elected in the caucus meetings.  Reputable organizations with a voting membership typically allow for an alternate to be elected to replace a delegate that cannot attend.  This keeps the power in the grassroots and avoids giving power to party leaders to select their favorites to stack the vote. 

Resolution Proposals
#1: Immigration and Inclusion Resolution – YES, but only with several amendments
Submitted by Marco Diaz (Salt Lake County, 801.641.8956).
While some of the language could have been refined to reflect more accurate information, its intent is to encourage the Republican Party to reach out to legal immigrants and to encourage them to become part of the Republican Party.

We know that 70-80% of Hispanic voters vote Democratic.  We must reach them with our principled, limited government message.  Our values may or may not align with theirs because we do know that Utah may face unsustainable costs associated with Medicaid expansion, and illegal immigration already costs Utah $453 million.  Utah is now ranked #4 in illegal aliens per capita.

The language in the paragraph surrounding the phrase “square themselves” is problematic for two reasons:  First, this language was not clearly presented to the SCC.  Additionally, it is being used in Washington to promote the Obama administration’s amnesty policies.

We also know that an increase of visas statistically increases the number of illegal aliens because 40% overstay their visas and then violate the law by so doing.  To encourage an increase of visas encourages illegal status.

The GOP Platform is a strong and compassionate platform that welcomes legal immigrants, but the language in this resolution does not mention legal or illegal.

Let’s continue to welcome great legal immigrants who embrace Republican principles and our platform and with whom we already enjoy working.  Let’s also commit to reach out to all legal immigrants to educate them about our conservative principles.

#2. Utah Compact Resolution – NO
Submitted by Diane Christensen (Utah County, 801.377.5912)
Contrary to the previous resolution, this resolution did not come before the State Central Committee and has had no discussion.

In addition, this resolution refers to a statement of beliefs that amnesty supporters have taken to Washington D.C. and heavily lobbied members of Congress with it.

These vague principles have been used and abused here in Utah with interpretations that not only violate the GOP platform, but they even violate some religious policies on illegal immigration  – and in the name of religion.

Republicans in Washington have rejected the Utah Compact.  I know.  I have spoken at Republican events in DC in which I’ve been asked questions about it, and it is nothing about which to be proud.  In fact, it has been embarrassing for Utah.

You may ask: “Who could disagree with these ideals?”  The “devil” is in the details.

In reality, the reason so many Republicans in DC are concerned is that these ideals are being used deceptively by President Barack Obama, the Democrats and a small band of rogue and, quite honestly, liberal Republicans in Washington DC  for the purpose of imposing amnesty on our state and nation.

Therefore, in principle they are worthy, but in practice, the Utah Compact violates the Utah and national GOP Platforms and is being used to impose comprehensive immigration reform that our Congressional Delegation opposes.

#3. Common Core State Standards Resolution – YES
Submitted by Cherilyn Eagar (Salt Lake County, 801.592.4245)
This resolution OPPOSES nationalized education called “Common Core.”
This resolution SUPPORTS  the Republican platform that opposes national, top down and one-size-fits-all education.

The Republican National Committee recently passed a similar resolution by unanimous consent in opposition to “Common Core” – the Obama Administration’s federal takeover of standards, tests, assessments, and curriculum. This version is tailored specifically to Utah.

This resolution has widespread support from delegates, Utah’s Congressional delegation and from over 5,500 petition signers – more than any other resolution before the convention. Congressman Rob Bishop is speaking in favor of this resolution.  In addition, Senator Grassley has filed an amendment to de-fund Common Core and remove it from the national agenda.

The Common Core Standards were funded and written primarily by liberal Democrats and are endorsed by and being forced on the states by President Obama and his administration.  First we had ObamaCare.  Now ObamaCore.  If you dislike the first, you will surely dislike the latter.

This week an unprecedented mailer was sent to every delegate at taxpayer expense from the Utah State Office of Education in an attempt to discredit this resolution.  Not only was that improper use of our tax dollars, the information we received was inaccurate.

This resolution has 46 citations, over 150 delegate co-sponsors and over 5,500 non-delegate petition signers opposing Common Core.  This is more support than any resolution today or in our memory in the Utah Republican Party.  We stand by every statement in this resolution with solid evidence to back it up.

The USOE would like us to believe that Utah is autonomous from the federal government.  Such is not the case.  In 2009, Utah clamored for stimulus money and hastily adopted the Common Core standards before they were written!

The Obama administration has been heavy-handed with the No Child Left Behind waivers, mandating Common Core in every state that sought them, including Utah.  You can know that this administration is up to no good when they are so vigorously dangling the carrot and stick in Utah.

For more information go to Stop by the booth at the convention for answers to any questions you may have. This brief flyer will give you a quick summary.  If you would like to schedule a presentation in your area, contact Cherilyn Eagar 801-592-4245.

#4. Medicaid Expansion and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act – YES
Submitted by Cherilyn Eagar (Salt Lake County, 801.592.4245)
This resolution supports the Republican Platform opposing nationalized health care as well as the state’s opt-out provision in our state code.  During the week of May 19, 2013 Congress is scheduled to vote on whether or not to defund ObamaCare (ACA). This is a timely measure.

Utah is one of only a few states that has a state insurance “exchange,” through which ObamaCare and Medicaid expansion will be implemented in every state.  However, Utah has not yet decided whether it will expand Medicaid, the key to nationalizing health care.

This resolution is being presented at a critically important time to encourage our state legislature, our governor and our Congressional delegation to take action to prevent nationalized health care and Medicaid Expansion in Utah.