A Delegate’s Perspective: Iowa GOP State Convention



RPI-LOGOBy Megan Stuhr

Saturday was the 2012 Iowa GOP State Convention. It also was the Democratic State Convention but judging by the crowd there, no one got the memo. On the GOP agenda was electing the National Committeeman and Committeewoman, election of At-Large National Convention Delegates, Alternative Delegates and Presidential Electors, a proposed amendment to the Constitution of the RPI and the platform. It took less than an hour for the first firework display.

The first commotion was over Rule 28. Rule 28 states that ‘the person receiving the highest number of votes for the election of National Committeeman and Committeewoman shall be elected’. After debate, the rule was changed from the highest vote getter in the first ballot to the person reaching a 50 percent threshold and being the highest vote getter. This played a role in the National Committeewoman election.

The next brouhaha was over Rule 25b. Rule 25 states that ‘separate amendments from the floor for delegate-at-large, or presidential elector-at-large shall be subordinate to a single vote up or down on the report as a whole’. The original amendment (25b) would allow for a vote on individuals for the national delegates who would have to be present to be nominated. There were amendments, amendments to the amendments, amendments to the amendment’s amendment, calls for point of order, calls for division, voice votes, standing votes, written ballots and the threat of removal for disrespectful behavior. Best line of the day was the suggestion that anyone wanting to be a delegate to the National Convention should go to the cage (located down the hall for UFC fights) and work it out. Eventually (and after lunch, yes we broke for lunch with only one, single item resolved) 25b failed.

The next debate was over the proposed amendment to the RPI Constitutional Article IV State Central Committee. The amendment read ‘no member or officer of the Republican State Central Committee, including Iowa’s representatives to the Republican National Committee, shall publicly endorse a candidate or candidate’s committee in a Republican primary or caucus. Neither shall they publicly denounce any Republican candidate’. This discussion went better as they adhered to the rules allowing only three speakers in favor and three opposed. The amendment failed.

The last debate was over the election of the slate of delegates chosen to attend the National Convention. This caused quite a flurry as the majority of those chosen were Ron Paul supporters. Tension was high but was highly entertaining (in the way bad reality tv is entertaining). After a few votes, the slate of candidates was accepted and I would anticipate a Ron Paul vote in Tampa.

Speeches

I’m not sure what was in Governor Branstad’s coffee, but that was the most energetic I’ve heard him. I wasn’t impressed with the content of his speech, but kudos to him for the spectacular energy level. Chuck Grassley, Matt Schultz (I love voter ID too), Kim Reynolds, Tom Latham, Linda Upmeyer, Kraig Paulsen, Jerry Behn, John Archer and Ben Lange all spoke as well. Steve King was the most well received speaker by far. He spoke about the President’s fiat decision to grant amnesty to millions. His threat to bring suit against the President of the United States to block the executive order brought the most cheers. I will credit the Congressman with being one of the few that didn’t try to sell me the “Romney will save the day” line. He said, “I trust Mitt Romney to do the right thing, some of you may not but you can trust Barack Obama to do the wrong thing.” I wish more politicians would take a cue from Congressman King – on a lot of things. Another speaker that resonated with me was Brad Zaun. He has been doing some noteworthy work on education and banning traffic cams. His call to find out where our candidates stand and hold them accountable was on the money. His line about Boswell being a desperate old man made me laugh out loud.

The best speech of the day, in my opinion, came from a junior delegate, Benjamin Dirks. He spoke of the ideas set forth in the Declaration of Independence being what makes America great (and he’s right on that). He left with the caution that we are only as strong as we the people. The adults(ish) then debated weather we would adopt the 3 planks the junior delegates offered to the platform. Guess that speech fell on deaf ears….

National Committeeman

I had heard much talk about this race prior to the convention. The Iowa Republican, Jan Mickelson and Steve Deace all discussed allegations of misconduct on the part of Steve Scheffler this past week. In his speech, Scheffler discussed the “elephant in the room” implying he was wrongfully accused because he fought for social issues the past 25 years when doing so was an unpopular stance to take. He claimed his integrity is well established. David Chung, Robert Cramer and Judd Saul also ran for the RNC post. Chung said integrity was the primary criteria for job, Cramer spoke about creating a movement to teach conservatism and Saul said he was running, in part, because of the allegations against Scheffler. In the end, Scheffler was re elected after a run off vote against David Chung 889 to 781. This was one debate that I did not find entertaining and how he secured the backing of Ron Paul people I’ll never understand. Seeing as I have nothing kind to offer here, I will simply suggest you visit the links above for information regarding Mr. Scheffler.

National Committeewoman

This position was being vacated by Kim Lehman and was another hotly debated election. Margaret Stoldorf, Tamara Scott, Judy Davidson and Kim Pearson were nominated. Stoldorf spoke about focusing on the grassroots and not just fundraising, Davidson spoke of 3 reasons to vote for her – experience, proven results and commitment to excellence. Tamara Scott spoke of her assets in media, her ability to network and coming together as a party. She promised not to waiver in her principles as she worked the process. Her resume for the position is quite impressive. Kim Pearson spoke about the hit piece the Iowa PAC put out (they forgot to mention that she was to the right of the Republicans on the votes listed on the flier). She also spoke of unwavering principles noting that Truth divides. She noted that as a party we should unite around principles. She asked which God given rights should she be willing to negotiate away to get a deal done (and she’s right on that). Her speech received a standing ovation. In the first ballot, Pearson received 755 votes and Scott received 514. There is some ‘discussion’ as to what happened behind the scenes during the run off vote between Scott and Pearson but Tamara Scott won the election 826-782. Congratulations to her.

Some other noteworthy issues came from Kim Lehman. She spoke of her concern over Agenda 21 and the growing popularity of the national vote compact. She urged delegates to stay on top of these issues. I stayed for a few of the platform debates but it was time to go when the delegation needed reminding that it would be another two hours before another vote on a quorum could be called.

If you like what you read, sign-up to get CT in your inbox!

Comments

  1. says

    Good write-up. I was there as a delegate too. It is unfortunate that the nominating committee choose to ‘stack the deck’ with Ron Paul delegates. Rick Santorum (who won our state caucus) got the short end of the stick and his delegates should have been proportionately represented. I was very disappointed with the anti-Kim Pearson hit piece that was distributed; Kim is a good woman and did not deserve that treatment. Tamara Scott will be a great chairwoman, but Kim would have been good as well. I wish we could have elected a new delegation chairman. Time was a big factor and I hope we can figure out a way to use electronic tabulation in future conventions.

    • says

      I can’t speak to the “hit-piece” on Kim. Personally I like her, and she is a good woman. I don’t believe she is qualified however for this particular position. Here is one reason why – http://blogs.desmoinesregister.com/dmr/index.php/2011/04/18/pearsons-reception-in-house-republican-caucus-may-be-colder-today/.

      This is one example of three or so speeches I’ve heard where she has done this. The National Committeewoman needs to yes hold to principles, which I believe Tamara will do, and represent different elements of the party which I don’t think Pearson could do. You may disagree, but there is a pretty straightforward job description for this role and Kim, in my estimation, just isn’t a good fit.

      • says

        I agree (from what I’ve seen and heard) that Tamara will do an excellent job at the committewoman position. I understand your point, Shane, about Kim’s fit for this role. I think there might be a role that is more impactful for Kim’s voice (which I LOVE). The hit piece the Iowa PAC distributed has to be one of the most rediculous things I’ve ever seen. If you didn’t know Kim’s record you would have thought she was a Dem. It suggested she voted for late term abortions, wasteful spending, earmarks, etc. It was awful.
        I will say the run off ballot for committeewoman was the first time I have looked at a ballot and felt we couldn’t go wrong with either choice. I want to feel that way every time I vote in a primary!

      • says

        Obviously her votes were taken out of context, but she did vote no on the late-term abortion ban so in effect she did vote with the House Democratic caucus. Her reasons for voting no were obviously different than the Democrats.

        She was largely in effective as a legislator, now if there were 60 Kim Pearson-like legislators and we had a Senate with a majority of Kim Pearsons it would be a different story. A legislator needs to be able to move the ball forward and realize they aren’t going to get everything they want. Especially when are a road block for othe legislators’ bills. Also demonizing opponents over strategy differences won’t help your cause either. Kim is an incredibly principled person, but she was not winsome. You need both in a legislator and with the National Committeewoman.

        My two cents, that said I believe she is a great mom, I’m impressed by her kids. She’s a servant and did care about her constituents, and she loves Jesus. She also did exactly what she said she would do when she campaigned so I can only respect her for that.