Summary of CMV – SB54On Aug 26, 2016 Comments Off on Summary of CMV – SB54
On Saturday, September 27, 2016, the Utah State Central Committee is meeting. A discussion regarding the ongoing legal challenge to defend a constitutional-representative form of elections versus the legislature’s unconstitutional interference with the First Amendment rights of a private corporation to assemble, establish its rules and set membership qualifications is scheduled. This summary is intended especially for its new members and those that have not been involved in the research and deliberations among Party leadership since 2013.
Original legal brief from DC Lobbyists Caplin and Drysdale, a DC firm that represented the Democratic National Committee and established Stephen Colbert’s SuperPAC for the purpose of mocking Republican candidates including Mitt Romney. Caplin & Drysdale is part of a national movement called “Count My Vote” to eliminate caucuses in all 50 states and to move this nation further away from the framer’s original intent to keep the power separated and guarded against consolidation.
This document outlining the supposed unconstitutionality of a caucus was emailed to members of the SCC the afternoon before its quarterly meeting and only a handful of members had been able to review it before the meeting. I was among them and I stood and spoke specifically to my findings.
I did some research on the authors of this document and learned their roles in the lobbyist firm found in this document.
This brief also clearly outlines what the legislature then put into a bill, SB 54 and, with the governor’s signature, was adopted into law.
It is a conflict of interest to give the decision-making power to the very people that will benefit from weakening and eventually destroying the caucus, the incumbent, the candidate with the name ID and access to lobbyist money.
I then researched the CMV donor records and took a screen shot of initial donors. They represent Utah’s best and brightest and most successful (and respectable) “Establishment.” Typically they are doing a favor for a friend (e.g. “I’ll give to your cause if you’ll give to mine.”) without really understanding what’s at stake.
One donor includes the husband of the newly elected national committeewoman. Her brother was also elected. Throughout his tenure, he presented the case urging the SCC to be conciliatory and to react to the demands of CMV. The Party voted to support a lawsuit, and now we have elected by acclamation two people that have actively opposed this position.
Layne Beck, an SCC member from Cache County, secured an attorney, Christ Troupis (yes, that’s the correct spelling, pronounced Chris with a t.) and my PAC, American Leadership Fund, paid for his travel expenses to deliver a speech to the SCC about the constitutional case for keeping the caucus. He received a standing ovation to a cheering crowd.
A core group of SCC members, of which I have been a part, vigilantly researched and led the movement to stand for the constitutional principles that are being eroded on every front, every policy and every issue. Fred Cox researched the statistics surrounding the threshold levels and discovered that the 60% threshold was the balance that sent equal candidates to a Primary and a nomination at the convention.
When Enid Mickelson made a push for a higher threshold, I created this flyer to make the point of “fairness.”
After we won, the SB 54 challenge began and the law passed. Funds were raised for its defense. Many long and hard hours were devoted to the preservation of the constitutional caucus and hard-earned funds from each of the counties. One of our recently deceased party workers, Rick Votaw, was extremely generous personally.
We served on committees to improve the caucus and we continued to combat the very media outlets that benefit from a Primary and the large media buys necessary to win those elections.
The legislative sponsors insisted that SB 54 was a “compromise” but we knew, and it can be verified by reviewing the original Caplin-Drysdale document, that SB 54 and CMV delivered the same outcome. I produced this flyer that was distributed in several counties and to the delegate email list. This flyer includes some of the subject headings of blog posts I researched and distributed to SCC members and delegates over the course of this long process:
The State Central Committee now faces some important decisions.
- Does the Utah Republican Party continue to preserve the constitutional process or does it relinquish its right to determine its membership as a private corporation? Will Utah go the way of other states, such as Virginia, that have weakened the caucus to the degree that the political parties are mere “endorsement” bodies and lack any real strength? As such, those states have lost the edge and the majorities have moved to the Democrats.
- Does the party demand that legal counsel’s E&O insurance cover the legal expenses that the party would have been awarded had the deadlines been met as restitution for what the judge determined was worth denying the legal fees?
- Where do each of the SCC members and the national committee man and woman and executive committee members stand on preserving the caucus? We need to know. It is appropriate that we ask some serious questions: What happened with the national committeeman and woman elections? I understand that the previous committee people told the state party chairman that they were running again. Then within minutes of the filing deadline, he received a phone call from them saying they would not be running again, and then within minutes of that call, he received a call that two others had filed. I supported both of these people when they ran for office. But we need to know why this happened. We also need to know whether they support CMV. They are brother and sister and the record shows that the sister’s husband gave $25,000 in opposition to the Party.
- Finally, in this contentious election season, it is critically important for those who serve in elected Republican positions from Chairman, Executive Committee and State Central Committee, to publicly state whether they support the Republican nominee for President. We need all hands on deck to prevent the alternative from being elected.
If you have any questions, I will be at the meeting Saturday, August 27, 2016 and will be happy to answer your questions.
Cherilyn Bacon Eagar
PS – In principle, this contentious election season and the warring factions of a two party system are the result of elected officials and citizens that held self-interest and special interest above the Constitution. They abandoned the original document. They went against George Washington’s warning and plea NOT to create two parties (as England had) and after the Adams administration, they began the process of creating a two party system. To quote a Republican candidate: “It IS rigged.” It is rigged against the people in that the 17th, 16th and 12th Amendments have created a democracy in the election process rather than maintained the republic.
Where are all those candidates that professed to be “constitutionalists?” Why are they not standing for the checks and balances and separation of powers both vertically and horizontally that the framers created?
I was elected Presidential Elector, one of six for Utah. It is a farce. The original electoral college was destroyed in the Aaron Burr-Thomas Jefferson election. If the original electoral college were functioning today, we would not be sitting in this body spending money and grooming candidates in how to pay-to-play in this system. We would not have candidates that can’t even pay their mortgages or sell their homes for what they paid for them that serve as Senators and then leave office as multi-millionaires.
Instead, if the original electoral college were in place today, there would be NO parties. The people would not elect a president.
The states would elect Presidential Electors equal to the number of the state’s congressional delegation (Utah would have six). There would be 535 electors that would gather to NOMINATE people that are principled and qualified to lead. Each state’s delegation would vote for TWO names to send to the US Senate for tallying.
The US Senate would then send the TOP FIVE candidates to the U.S. House. Each state would cast its vote by delegation and would get 1 vote. The top vote-getter would be elected President and the second place candidate would be Vice President.
The US Senate would not be elected by popular vote. It would be elected by the representatives the people in the state had elected – the state legislature.
The only body that would be elected by the people was the U.S. House of Representatives, the “people’s house.”
Among the most egregious perversions along with the 17th Amendment during the Democratic Wilson administration was the decision to give government the power and authority to steal personal property, rather than to ask other foreign interests to provide revenue. With the 16th Amendment, the people gave Congress a blank check to dig its own grave in debt and bloated spending. The solution is NOT to further amend and pervert the Constitution. It is to seriously examine that original document and to find the wisdom already in it and to RESTORE it.
The founders feared and deplored democracy. They recognized from history that it always had a contentious and volatile ending. Do we not see that this is the path we are pursuing?
The only level of deliberation among citizens in which a democracy worked was at the very closest level to the people. Democracy worked only among small numbers of people. THAT was the neighborhood caucus. That system itself has been perverted because those that elevated their own interests above Liberty, the Constitution and the Republic sought to overthrow it as soon as it was ratified.
Is a nation too big to fail? I think it is just the opposite. Its bigness, its consolidation of power, is its failure.
Did you know that the population of Utah now exceeds the population of all 13 states at the time the union was formed? Utah now has over 3 million people residing within its state borders. And Utah is one of the smaller states in the union.
In 1789 the population of the 13 states was estimated to be around 2.5 million. The founders and framers believed THAT was too big for democracy. What have we done? Here we are fighting with each other and with other friends and neighbors in a two-party system that now has a populace so angry and frustrated, that if we aren’t careful, mass persuasion may assume mob rule and yield to anarchy for resolution.
If the members of this party, of any party – especially the Constitution Party – want to save this Republic, they need only look at the original document and its brilliant bicameral form of government and system of elections that separated out the special and self-interest to prevent consolidation of power, as the solution. All else is a distraction.
Our goal over the next four years should be to educate the public on these principles and to dissolve the parties and to plug up the gaping holes in this broken and sinking ship before it’s too late.