Unity Delayed

My 2 Cents (5.00 / 5)

I had not intended to publicly discuss this development but since it is now in the public domain, here are my 2 cents.  

Moving the meeting to September does our party a grave disservice and sets a dangerous precedent.

I am very angry with the decision and I made my thoughts very clear to our Executive Director.  There are two factors at play here for me: the unity/grassroots/strategy that could have come out of the meeting & the principle of unilaterally changing the Summit after the date, time & location was fixed by a vote of the State Committee.

The timing of the US Senate special election was known when an overwhelming number of State Committee voted to establish the meeting.  The deadline for signatures is 5:00 pm on Wednesday, February 27.  Those local elections officials have until March 4 to finish certification and the deadline to submit the signatures to Galvin's office is March 6.  Therefore, I assert that there is not only on conflict with the March 2 Summit but that this is a window of opportunity in order to have the Summit!

A State Committee member expressed his inability to attend during our debate.  That gentleman was basically told to deal with it as the date, time, location & purpose were set.  Personally, I dealt with it by clearing my calendar - moving appointments at great personal inconvenience to me.  I didn't relish the thought of spending my time and money driving up to Worcester on a Saturday with the cost of gas & potentially a hotel room.  However, the vote was near unanimous & I voted for it.  I made a commitment.  That commitment shouldn't be changed.

Furthermore, that vote set the exact date, time & location of the meeting.  I'll stand to be corrected but I am unaware  of any authority, from the organizational committee, Executive Director, Chairwoman, or otherwise that can effectively either ignore or nullify a vote of the State Committee.  It is on this principle that I am outraged.  There has been no vote of the State Committee to undo or alter the motion that was made, seconded, debated, and passed at our last State Committee meeting.

I understand that there may be pragmatic and even practical concerns about attendance (quite probably very low) and cost but that's beyond the point.  The motion was passed the State Committee and there has been no effort to rescind or override that action by the State Committee.  If this motion can be brushed aside, even for legitimate reasons, then the action is illegitimate in my eyes for no authority other than a second vote of the State Committee can change that date, time, location & purpose.  

Even if it ended up being me and two other people meeting in  the proverbial phone booth at the Beechwood Hotel at 9:00 AM on Saturday, March 2 then so be it.  The show must go on for no valid authority can change what the State Committee has directed and ordered to be done.

While it may make perfect sense to postpone the Summit for a myriad of reasons, the principle stands. If we start selectively abiding by State Committee votes then what is next?  In 2007, we voted to instruct Chairman Torkildsen to send a letter to every Republican legislator to support the constitutional amendment in support of traditional marriage.  We did so in order to "let the people vote."  We voted to order the Chairman to do so - it was my first State Committee meeting as a new member & I spoke up in favor of the action.  Well, apparently now if the properly passed motion is unpopular then it can be simply ignored or nullified simply because it's undesired.

If attendance was the problem then I say that a damned good reason should be given for not attending the meeting.  I know my colleague who spoke up during the last meeting noted that he could not make it, and I respect that.  However, if we vote overwhelmingly to have a special meeting - this Summit - and now we simply blow it off then shame, shame on us as that's a horrible commentary on us as a State Committee.

A Summit six months from now is virtually worthless.  Now is the time to strike while the iron is hot.  We're still relatively early in the new year, at least in the first quarter.  We have a special election now but in September we will be planning the 2014 State Convention as well as be neck deep in candidate recruitment, training, etc.  There is never a good time but I believe that the Republican State Committee should be able to walk & chew gum at the same time!

Not only should the Summit proceed on March 2 but we should build upon it by breaking out by region and then even more locally to build upon the discussions arising at the Summit.  We should branch out from just a meeting of the State Committee & Legislative Caucus to our other elected officials, our town/ward & committee members, and all of our conservative Republican grassroots activists.

I've spent months serving upon the MassGOP Bylaw Committee, including several hours last night, commuting in the torrential rain.  Why have I wasted my time and effort to revise our State Committee's bylaws when the very basic principle of abiding by a (overwhelming) majority vote of the State Committee can be summarily ignored?!

Yes, I'm angry.  I'm also dismayed, disillusioned, and quite frankly wondering why I should even bother anymore.  Most of my colleagues & those reading this may think I'm utterly insane but so be it, I'll rant & rage by screaming into the wind.  The decision may have been practical, pragmatic, maybe even "necessary".  I fully believe that whoever authorized the change did so with the best of intentions and full interests at heart.  I don't ascribe any negative thoughts of bad motives.  Nevertheless, the decision remains wrong and I feel compelled to express my belief for the public record.

Sincerely,

Brock N. Cordeiro
Chairman, MassGOP Region 5
State Committee Member, Second Bristol & Plymouth  

---

by: BNCordeiro @ Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 22:53:08 PM UTC

Well done Brock, and (5.00 / 1)

it very much needed to be said, and needs to be addressed.  Such action can only serve to nullify every other vote of the committee if this is left to stand as is, thus, what would be the point of voting, or the committee?

---

by: Term Limits @ Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 00:17:56 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Brock, as always a reasonable voice in the wilderness. (0.00 / 0)

Brock;

I've read with some interest (and not a little disgust) all of the goings on in the MAGOP over the last few months.  

Commenters on RedMassGroup has shined a spotlight on, and actively participated in the petty bickering, name calling and playground antics that go on behind the scenes.  It is disheartening and I think spells doom for the MAGOP for the foreseeable future.

YOUR post, as always, is thoughtful, informative and tactful.  If they have "lost" you, even on this one issue, it should be a slap in the face, wake-up call to those who hold the reins of responsibility.  I do not believe they can afford to lose you on ANY issue.

"Gee, I had no idea..."  Simple J. (Festus) Malarkey  

---

by: V @ Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 12:40:08 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

SPOT ON! (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Term Limits @ Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 18:49:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Wow - now you have done it (5.00 / 4)

You have ticked off someone who gives his all to the Party - Brock and I have not agreed on some issues but for the most part I will say that Brock if nothing else is 100% dedicated to the MA Gop.

We have a big problem with not being a cohesive unit.

---

by: Millie @ Wed Feb 20, 2013 at 23:36:37 PM UTC

Unity (4.67 / 3)

I was 100% for Rick Green for Chair and have warmed to the spirit of unity and doing my best to help Kirsten Hughes forward.

I think we need to rebrand forward. We need to start winning. We need to see where we can all get along. I am personally line up on the right Conservative/Teaparty. I can see commonality with the Liberty groups. I struggle with the Moderates, even moreso in Dem Lite appeasement tone than I do idealogue.

How do we move forward? Pick the best all the factions have and harness it. Romney brings first class fundraising and Organizational Structure. Scott Brown won with a lot of that in 2010. The Liberty Ron Paul camp bring grassroots, energy and inroads on taking over the process.

The best way to bridge these gaps is to inject new candidates, new ideas that all can line up behind and support. I fear retread candidates just fosters old illwillS. I look forward to working with all here in rebuilding the #MAgop and taking it to the real bastards, One party rule Corruptocrats -> @MassDems    

---

by: Norsu @ Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 03:00:59 AM UTC

I can see maybe... (0.00 / 0)

...a one moth delay, or at most two.

But not SIX!!

"Don't let me get away with it. Check me out. Don't be the sucker generation." -Ronald Reagan

www.inBrockton.com

---

by: BrocktonDave @ Thu Feb 21, 2013 at 16:45:08 PM UTC

WOW - This is Kirsten Hughes at her strongest! (0.00 / 0)

LOL what a mess.  

Molon Labe

---

by: Republican Ram Rod Radio @ Mon Feb 25, 2013 at 18:23:21 PM UTC

No Unity Meeting But Time for a Straw Poll (0.00 / 0)

I am bemused and befuddled by how we cannot have time for a Unity Conference amongst the MassGOP SC but have time for a straw poll organized by the MassGOP.

I am actually speechless about the complete disregard for a SC vote on the date of the Unity Conference.

So SC members, what say you, do you have time for the Straw Poll but not for the Unity Conference?

And one last question/observation - less than a week after postponing the Unity Conference a Straw Poll is announced.  Sort of confused by the timing and contradiction in the stated reasons for why the Unity Cnference could not be held.

---

by: ConsEph @ Mon Feb 25, 2013 at 22:39:57 PM UTC

My first thought (0.00 / 0)

My first thought when I read the email was "please don't tell me that we cancelled the Summit for THIS?!?!"

I have written to our Executive Director noting the irony of the straw poll being the same as the postponed Summit.  To be fair, I have a feeling that the straw poll was likely planned independently by those in and around Danvers and that it's likely that the MassGOP sponsorship is more of a formal embrace of the project.

Another State Committee member sent an email cc'ed to all of our colleagues noting that they believed that it was "extremely inappropriate for the Mass GOP to sponsor this type of event until signatures are at the least verified at Galvin's office and we have actual candidates for the office." This individual went beyond to note that they believed any straw poll should not occur until after March 4.

I'm inclined to agree as we won't even have the fully, locally certified, signature results until the evening of the 4th and then the deadline to file is the evening of the 6th.

Finally, I don't know if the Summit should really be referred to as a "Unity Conference" as the actual event wasn't billed as such but more so a strategic discussion and planning summit.  I'm not dismissing a unity aspect, I believe the actual word used, twice, was "collaboration" and at least once was "agreement" but I would caution over emphasizing a single aspect of the motion, that was made and near unanimously accepted, and not the broader text.  

---

by: BNCordeiro @ Tue Feb 26, 2013 at 00:34:36 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Grassroots Workshop (0.00 / 0)

Also scheduled for March 2 is a Grassroots Workshop from 9:00-11:00 AM at the Kowloon Restaurant in Saugus.

---

by: BNCordeiro @ Tue Feb 26, 2013 at 02:56:09 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Chairman Hughes on Straw Poll (0.00 / 0)

This email from MassGOP Chairman Kirsten Hughes was sent out earlier today to the members of the State Committee:

Dear State Committee Members,

Thank you for the feedback in response to the March 2 MassGOP straw poll in Danvers that I announced yesterday. Not sure what it was like with other Chairs, but I'm glad we have a lively email back and forth on relevant issues and wanted to take a moment to respond to some of the comments. Before sending this email, I spoke to Luke Noble, who has signed off and supports the straw poll. I also plan to attend and speak at Luke's workshop at the Kowloon in Saugus before heading to the straw poll, which I believe will turn out a ton of activists and help capture and harness the excitement out there in the field regarding our special elections.

As Committee members John McCarthy and Nancy Luther know, we tried very hard to find a venue for the poll in Peabody, the site of a closely contested special election for state representative that both of our GOP candidates have a great shot at winning in the general. Regretfully no venue could hold the expected amount of activists the US Senate campaigns might turnout for the poll, so we had to move the venue to Danversport Yacht Club, a public, not private club, because it could hold up to 500 people. I would never want to host an event and be in a position of turning people away. In response to the issue of charging people for a ballot, it's common practice in most straw polls I've been involved with to charge a fee in order to receive and cast a ballot, as it helps cover the cost of hosting the event.

Also, while we won't know for sure if our three candidates for US Senate are officially on the ballot, I've spoke to representatives from all three campaigns who have all indicated they want to participate in the straw poll regardless of the timing.

We have a unique opportunity to bring our grassroots activists all together on the North Shore this weekend to participate in multiple events that support our candidates by allowing them access to free media and potential volunteers. This should be considered a positive and the activists I've talked to believe it is. I look forward to seeing many of you on the North Shore this weekend! If you have any further questions, please let me know.

Respectfully,
Kirsten

---

by: BNCordeiro @ Tue Feb 26, 2013 at 22:00:57 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

MOTION TO CONVENE THE 2013 MASSACHUSETTS REPUBLICAN STATE COMMITTEE SUMMIT (0.00 / 0)

I've tried to reproduce the motion, as circulated via email as a .pdf file, below.  Since I had to retype it any typos are likely mine & not in the original.

According to the draft minutes of our most recent State Committee meeting, held on January 31, 2013 at the Newton Marriott, the vote to hold the Summit was unanimous (I had believed only "near" unanimous).

While the votes were being counted Brian Burke and Brent Andersen announced a March 2 summit for State Committee members only.  A motion was made to host the summit, and the motion passed unanimously.

MOTION TO CONVENE THE 2013 MASSACHUSETTS REPUBLICAN STATE COMMITTEE SUMMIT

WHEREAS, the Massachusetts Republican State Committee currently recognizes the critical need for its members to step back, take stock, engage in frank discussion of past practices and future goals, and reach consensus on a number of policy and strategic issues crucial to the continuing viability of our Commonwealth's Republican Party;

WHEREAS, a new Chair of the Massachusetts Republican State Committee shall be elected on January 31, 2013 before the instant motion is taken up, and it is advisable that he or she should speak t the members in a closed circle in order to develop consensus around a shared vision for the Massachusetts Republican Party; and

WHEREAS, a meeting of the Massachusetts Republican State Committee and all currently elected Massachusetts Republican State Senators and Representatives can be scheduled for Saturday, March 2, 2013 at the Beechwood Hotel in Worcester, Massachusetts at a reasonable cost.

BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED, that the Massachusetts Republican State Committee and the currently elected Massachusetts Republican State Senators and Representatives shall convene for a Summit on Saturday, March 2, 2013 at the Beechwood Hotel in Worcester, Massachusetts between 9:00 AM and 4:00 PM for, among other things, the following purposes:

1.  Reach a consensus on the identity, branding, direction, and message of the Massachusetts Republican Party;

2.  Reach agreement on long-term political and strategic goals that will grow enrollment in the Massachusetts Republican Party and elect more Republicans to state and federal office; and

3.  Reach a clear understanding of the role of the members of the Massachusetts Republican State Committee in achieving the goals agreed upon.

BE IT HEREBY FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Massachusetts Republican State Committee Chair shall appoint a Subcommittee of no more than four state committee members, as well as one elected Republican State Senator and one elected Republican State Representative, to plan the details of the March 2, 2013 Republican Party Summit and then to draft and submit a report summarizing the summit's proceedings for review, discussion, and adoption by the committee as a whole at its next regularly scheduled meeting.

Respectfully submitted and jointly moved:

Brent J. Andersen, Treasurer
Brian P. Burke

   

---

by: BNCordeiro @ Tue Feb 26, 2013 at 00:48:17 AM UTC

Fair Point (0.00 / 0)

Brock,

Your clarification of the purpose(s) for the postponed meeting of March 2nd is fair and valid.  Thanks.

I hope you will agree though that the Straw Poll announcement can lead some to question the stated reasons for the postponement.

I am less worried about holding a straw poll before the candidates are all "official" especially if all the candidates exceed 10,000 raw signatures handily.

---

by: ConsEph @ Tue Feb 26, 2013 at 03:06:04 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Agree? (0.00 / 0)

My first reaction was wondering if the Summit was postponed - at least in part - by the straw poll, especially if that was peeling away potential attendees (see also the Grassroots Workshop that I just posted about).

We've argued "optics" on here enough in the recent past & the optics of a events coincidentally coinciding with the unanimously passed, and then postponed, Summit look really bad.  I gravely disagree with the postponement on principle and for the missed opportunity but the perception of it may even be worse.

I also think that while being held with the best of intentions that holding a straw poll before we have official candidates is confusing.  Right now, we're going on Winslow's word of having enough signatures, an assumption that Gomez does as well and the hopes that Sullivan's volunteers will carry the day.  We may have some good indications by this Wednesday at 5:01 pm but we won't know for sure until at least Monday, March 4 and not even for certain until sometime after Wednesday, March 6.  Ask Jim Ogonowski about having enough certified signatures to count your proverbial chickens before they hatch.  Great idea but I don't agree with the timing.

---

by: BNCordeiro @ Tue Feb 26, 2013 at 03:17:53 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

The More I Think (0.00 / 0)

About the straw poll, the less I like its timing.

Here's why - I was asked how I would vote tonight and I argued that it was between Sullivan and Winslow as I did not know much about Gomez.  Right there, that got me, how can we have a straw poll when the voters do not know enough about the candidates and their positions to make an informed decision.  I complain about uninformed voters and here I was, all ready to become one.  

So I have been persuaded that the straw poll is a good idea, in April.

---

by: ConsEph @ Tue Feb 26, 2013 at 04:18:17 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

April? (0.00 / 0)

In addition to the arguable lack of information about the candidates, which was raised by at least one State Committee member over the past 24 hours, another grumble about the timing is how the straw poll is running at the exact same time as the Grassroots Workshop at Kowloon's.  

While the postponement of the Summit is freeing up some State Committee members to attend the other two events, personally, both are on the backside of Boston at 9:00 AM so I'm very unlikely to attend either as I'm deep down here in the bayou of the SouthCoast.  The Summit, I was going to trek over to Worcester for, but there may be other - more local - straw polls for all I know in the planning & I would hope closer grassroots workshops for activists down my way.  However, if the commute weren't so early or so distant I'd opt for the Grassroots event at Kowloon's.  In fact, talk about unity?  I'd like to work with my colleagues & other activists to host a similar event down around here.

I'm inclined to agree with you, April - or at least later in March - would be a better time for a US Senate special election straw poll.  I have no objection to the event - or several of them across the Commonwealth - but it's proving regrettably controversial.  

---

by: BNCordeiro @ Tue Feb 26, 2013 at 11:39:59 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Michael Sullivan "might run short on signatures" (0.00 / 0)

My local daily newspaper, the Standard-Times, ran an article today concerning the signature gathering process, deadlines, and obstacles titled "GOP Senate hopeful might run short on signatures".

"We'll probably be working on it until the last moment," said Holly Robichaud, spokesman for the volunteer effort to get former U.S. Attorney and Plymouth County District Attorney Michael Sullivan on the ballot for the April 30 Republican primary. "It's going to be a nail-biter."

The two other Republicans in the race, who both used paid signature collectors, said they won't have any problem meeting the deadline.

With fewer enrolled voters across the state, Republicans are at a disadvantage in collecting signatures. Those who sign must be of the same party as the candidate or unenrolled.

Collection of signatures also has been disrupted by three straight stormy weekends.

I'm certainly hoping that Sullivan's grassroots network can overcome those obstacles and make the ballot as of 5:00 pm tomorrow.

http://www.southcoasttoday.com...

---

by: BNCordeiro @ Tue Feb 26, 2013 at 12:32:24 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

To your point (0.00 / 0)

Actually, MassGOP Communications Director Tim Buckley also uses the "unity" phrase in an article I found this morning titled Schism between Massachusetts Republican Party and 'traditionally conservative' members still strong.

Tim Buckley, spokesman for the state party, said that Hughes is making good on her campaign promise to unify the party by putting energy into organizing a "unity conference" set to take place in the coming weeks.

The quote continues:

"It will be a closed-door event so the committee members can have the opportunity to speak freely and get it all out there," Buckley said. "The hope is that everyone can put the past aside and come up with a plan to move forward, together."

Unfortunately, the "closed-door event" (Summit) has now been postponed until September.  The article references that the "Massachusetts GOP is also planning on holding a forum to help boost the profile of the Republican candidates in the special election, something the party hasn't done in years."  I'm left wondering if this is supposed to be September's Summit or some other event about which I am currently unaware.

Encouragingly, for all:

Hughes said she takes her campaign pledge seriously and is looking to hear from concerned and angry Republicans with the goal of bringing everyone together and increasing the party's numbers significantly by the end of the year.

"I am taking steps to hear out the concerns from members of our party so that we can address those together and work towards 2014," Hughes said. "My job is to grow the party at every level and to do what we need to unite and focus on our common goal, which is electing more Republicans."

The article also contains scathing remarks about the MassGOP by David Kopcaz, President of the Massachusetts Republican Assembly, especially regarding the 2013 RNC Convention process.  The article does note the upcoming Special Meeting "to address past misgivings" on March 4.
http://www.masslive.com/politi...

---

by: BNCordeiro @ Tue Feb 26, 2013 at 12:17:08 PM UTC

[ Parent ]