My fellow members of the 11th District Executive committee,
I am very happy and honored to be writting each of you today to inform you on some of the recent activities of the Republican National Committee. The following information is based on first or second hand knowledge as well as publically accessible records or archives, and if you have questions I will be happy to answer them. Furthermore, I hope that each of you take this information and does two things; that you share this information with your county committees, and that you contact Chairman Robin Hayes, Committeeman David Lewis, or Committeewoman Ada Fisher using the contact information attached to let them know how you feel on the topic.
I begin with a very real and immediate issue; Gun Control.
As all of you are aware, the President and his army of Progressive spin artists and media outlets have picked up the recent shooting at Sandyhook and touted it around targetting assault rifles, extended ammo clips, and gun registration; knowing full well that hand guns, standard clips, and an un-registered teenager were involved. This cry however has not weakened, as many people are standing with the President believing that he is using this event to rid the country of "unnecessary" firepower. But, we have a problem with that. The issue we take with these people is that the 2nd Amendment was not written by game hunters, for game hunters; it was written by the people, for the people. The 2nd Amendment was written by a congress that knew (better than we do now) that there came times in the course of history that nations became corrupt, and individuals became detached from the law-makers that governed them. When the individual is not represented, their choice of leadership no longer matters, and their freedoms are placed 2nd to the "greater good"; it is essential that the state and local militia be equipped to defend themselves and fight back. On these grounds we have planted our flag, first as Americans, and then as Republicans. Yet, is this really "necessary", they say; don't we live in a county where our voices are heard and our vote counts? Haven't we outgrown the need for revolution?
That is really the question I put before you in this letter.
Have we outgrown the need for Revolution? Do our voices, knowledge, and opinions matter? Don't we have the ability to vote-in those with the eloquence and passion to rout those that would do our nation harm?
As I have come to learn, the higher you climb the ladder, I don't believe we do. Not when it counts.
The Republican ideal has been one of the individual and of the state. It has embodied the concept of personal responsibility and federal independence, while promoting capitalist ventures over government institutions. As a body we have been the champions of innovation and hands off economics, and all the while celebrated the freedom of one individual so long as those freedoms did not infringe upon the life, liberty, or pursuit of happiness of another. Furthermore, as proud children of our fore-fathers we salute the heritage that has been passed down to us and honor military sacrifice through diligent civil and electoral service. These are tenants that we have spent years and lives to uphold
It should then come as a surprise to hear about some of the rules changes that were "voted" in at Tampa's Republican National Committee Convention. (All of the following Rules will be attached to this email)
The first change was the creation of a NEW Rule 12. This Rule has made it possible for amendments to be made to the other existing rules BETWEEN official RNC conventions, given a 3/4 majority of support at any given RNC meeting . This of course means that an entire rule could be rewritten.
This change flies in the face of a traditional system that considers elected State and District delegate representation a requirement for any major change to the Party's rule structure. As such, it falls on us as County and District representatives to take serious time aside and consider if this is a direction that we want for the party.
The second change was Rule 16a1 (previously rule 15a1), which modified how State delegate representation was done. While previously there has been several States with a developed tradition of caucusing for State delegate seats, those States were told by the national RNC that their rules no longer applied, and that for the "Greater Good" of the party it was necessary that they represent their population proportionately.
The third rules change was Rule 16a2, which installed a provision that any delegate who showed SIGNS of support for a candidate other than the one they were slated to vote for would be stripped of their voting previlege, and a vote would then be made on their behalf.
(Previously delegates were allowed to write in who they supported in theory, but they were always expected to [and almost always did] honor their candidate with the actual floor vote)
Aside from the NCGOP (and most other states) already contracturally enforcing delegate integrity, it's important to note that every delegate is expected by the very peers who elect them to keep their word. This Amendment on the other hand tells you what your word will be. Furthermore, this rule changes the very purpose of delegates from a elected representative who is passionate and interested in discussing the future of our Party at a national gathering of his or her peers, to a mere body in a seat, smiling at the camera.
The fourth rule was Rule 32, which increased the minimum threshold for Suspension of the Rules from 5 to 7 states. This was one of 4 rules that increased the minimum threshold for a motion to pass, which in effect was designed to silence any minority voice of the RNC.
The fifth rule was going to be Rule 34, but as many of its own supporters did not understand the ramifications of this change, they joined the rest of the delegates in booing it down. Consequently, before the speaker could motion to create the rule, it was withdrawn. The intended effects of Rule 34 would have made it such that no documentation would ever be made public from RNC meetings unless 40% of the attending members supported the motion. This was an increase from 25%, and in effect it would have silenced any dissenting voices that attended RNC meetings. (Also, silencing the minority)
Unfortunately, because Rule 12 was allowed to pass, this rule and many others can not only be installed without the representation of State delegates, but it can be modifed and amended before we ever take our seats in 2016.
The sixth rule was Rule 39, which was modified to change the number of States required for a roll call from 6 to 7. Again, this is one of 4 rules changes designed to increase minimum thresholds, effectively silencing minority voices.
The seventh rule was Rule 40b, which was modified to change the number of necessary State pluralities for nomination from 5 to 8. This change was done almost explictly to silence the Ron Paul Delegation, which had satisfied the necessary 5 state pluralities (with 6 Pluralities, and almost 7), and demonstates in the most apparent and bold fashion the willingness of a central voice (specifically, our RNC) to do away with anything that does not work into their plans.
It is VERY important to realize that these changes were not made by a concerned delegate about the future and growth of their party, but rather by one Mr. Ben Ginsberg; delegate from Washington DC, representative and spokeman for the Mitt Romney Presidential Campaign, and friend of Reince Priebus.
It is ALSO very important that you understand the method by which these motions were passed. While the media did not cover the fact, and no one(that I'm aware of) from the RNC has made motions against it, the Republican National Convention of delegates was run on a script. It has been recorded on video and since acknowledged that the motion, second, and passage of these previously mentioned Rules Changes were not carried out by counting of hands or electronic representation, but read off a Teleprompter, as it was an "acknowledged fact" that the motions would carry. There were ZERO "No" votes recorded, and no actual counts were made.
Are we satisfied that our party's National Convention of elected delegates has been reduced to nothing more than a TV show?
As you can tell by reading these Rules Changes, the atmosphere that the Repubulican party is on course to adopt is NOT the atmosphere of individual representation and delegate participation. It could be argued of course that minority voices at this point are all "bad" influences, and the party is better off without them, but how "bad" and "uncivilized" were those American colonists, and how long did England think that they'd hold on to their unrepresented territories; maybe we should ask India.
In my young and humble opinion, the very nature of bottom-up repesentation in the Republican party is under attack. If the threat posed to us by the Democrat and Progressive camps are to be defeated on a cultural as well as political level, then it is required of us that we give the non-ambitious (but concerned and passionate) delegates who are most familmiar with their arguments a chance to speak out and enrich the rest of us with counter-points, platform changes, and most importantly; just an opportunity to talk.
Strictly concerning elections, something should be said. Elections in this country are currently the way of change, but looming over every win and every loss that happens each election is a staggering statistic. Even with this last election reporting record numbers for voter turn-out, the actual number of people not voting in America still rests at 40 to 50%. This in turn then gives us a duty, and that is to ask people "Why didn't you vote?". I've already asked my precinct people why they didn't vote, and I encourage you to do the same if you haven't already. Their answers will vary of course, but after discussing this with several people I've realized that most Americans feel that the parties are something that they “subscribe” to, rather than participate. Personally, I would like to change their minds.
I hope you understand now that the direction of our National leadership has and will continue to be that of the "Private Party". If hope for a better tomorrow is going to survive, then the attitude and mentality of our leadership has to be challenged, and there are few places better to start than in the ranks of our local leadership. The American people need to have hope in their rights to change the political landscape, and have faith that their innovative and unique perspectives CAN be heard by a body of their peers.
Thank you for reading, and may God bless you.
Michael J. Lyons