MY PERSPECTIVE: THE DAY WE BEGAN TO TAKE-BACK OUR PARTY! + PROXIES!

[Itasca Small]

My Perspective:
AZGOP Mandatory Meeting
by Itasca Small

Saturday, January 27, 2018:

THE DAY WE, THE PEOPLE, BEGAN TO TAKE-BACK OUR PARTY!!!

I was one of the SCs whom the LORD used to fight for Our Party!

For those who ask: “WHY?”

The meeting itself was out of order and should never have left the starting-gate due to failure to effect the required, complete, Mandatory Meeting, Call Notice to every State Committeeman! We did not raise this point of order.

[Clarification: “When a member thinks that the rules of the assembly are being violated, he can make a Point of Order . . . thereby calling upon the chair for a ruling and an enforcement of the regular rules.” RONR (11th ed.), Ch.VIII. §23]

We fought the parliamentary war waged on Saturday for several purposes; one was to expose the egregious actions of the Executive Committee in their continuing inexcusable treatment of our duly-elected Secretary, Gabby Mercer! Joe Neglia moved to place the Secretary’s Report on the Agenda! And, YOU voted to give Secretary Gabby Mercer the floor to charge Chairman Lines and others before the assembly!

Another purpose was to defeat Proposed Bylaw Amendments that were worded to tighten the GOPe stranglehold on our Party. They attempted to slip them all past us by falsely claiming: “These changes are non-controversial and procedural.” Well, WE, the People, still read!

Two of the Proposed Amendments were Letters D&M: “D” would have made it possible to nullify Robert’s Rules of Order!

“M” would have raised the bar from 20 to 40%, for the number of members required to sign a petition calling for a Special Meeting! The amendment was clearly offered because of the attempt by membership to call a Special Meeting, in 2017. If your dog slips his leash, what do you do? Tighten the collar! That’s what this amendment would have done to US.

A third crucial amendment was Letter “N.” This change would have set in the Bylaws the right of each State Committeeman to carry and vote two proxies. Sounds good? Ahh, we could have stopped the proxy abuse that helped the GOPe takeover our Party! Or, could we have?

Maybe we should “do the math:” On Saturday, LD28 had 40 SCs present, who carried 55 proxies, an average of 1.375 proxies per attending SC. Hypothetically, if each LD28 SC present carried 2 proxies, the total SCs represented could be: 40 + (40x2) = 40 + 80 = 120, or, 25 more votes than Saturday—55 proxy votes could increase to 80—Not such a good deal, after all. . . .

So, what can we do?

We can take the time-proven advice of Robert’s Rules of Order: “Proxy voting is not permitted in ordinary deliberative assemblies . . . Ordinarily it should neither be allowed nor required, because proxy voting is incompatible with the essential characteristics of a deliberative assembly in which membership is individual, personal, and nontransferable. . . . ” RONR (11th ed.), Ch.XIII.§45

Also, “If any members are absent . . . the members present at a regular or properly called meeting act for the entire membership . . .” RONR (11th ed.), Ch. I, §1

Proxy voting is a negative force that, as we have learned, can be used to effect an artificial Majority reigning as tyrants! Because it is incompatible with the principles of Liberty and Self-Governance upon which our Nation under God is founded.

The solution is to end the practice entirely in our Party meetings! With eliminating proxy voting, the Ghost PC problem will also be resolved.

Tabling further action on the Proposed Bylaw Amendments pulled from the consent calendar stopped Amendment Letter “N” making the proxy problem worse!

* * *
Saturday’s Quorum was certified at: Present 581 Proxies 388 Total 969

With 388 proxies still allowed on Saturday, the voting was stacked against us. So, we used parliamentary tools and scored big wins with our successful motions! And, the points of order we won were huge! The two-front offensive culminated in a Major Victory for We, the People!

1. We successfully wielded basic Robert’s Rules to score important parliamentary victories.
2. Secretary Mercer exposed Jonathan Lines and the Executive Committee.
3. The Proposed Bylaw Amendments that were pulled from the consent calendar are DEAD!

NOTE: Not all of the Amendments were removed from the consent calendar. Those remaining were declared passed without the voice vote required by the Rules!

* * *

[Following are highlights of the parliamentary war waged, and do not include every tactic or detail.]

1. Joe Neglia moved to amend the Agenda to add the Secretary’s Report! Some confusion. Motion carried.

2. Joe Neglia moved to remove four Proposed Rules. Chaotic parliamentary discussion ensued; the chair finally ordered a manual, written, vote tally—including proxies—recorded by LD Chairmen; facilitated by the Teller’s Committee. Motion failed; Rules were adopted.

3. Item 6. Secretary’s Report. In fearless, righteous indignation, Secretary Gabby Mercer came-out firing verbal salvos at Chairman Lines and the Executive Committee regarding their refusal to provide her with the permanent party records, rendering her unable to perform the duties of her office. In the midst of calls for Lines to respond, a member went to the microphone and asked Lines, “Why . . . ?”
    3.1 Mercer still had the floor! So—out of order—Lines came-forward and threw-out a preposterous excuse for this travesty. He could just as well have said, “There are blue elephants on the Moon!”
   3.2. Joe Neglia immediately moved for the removal of Lines from office. I quickly seconded (there may have been others, but I didn’t hear any). The motion was impeccably timed! and, in accordance with the bylaws! But, when the Question was called at Warp-Speed, using a rule-violating voting procedure, we were caught by surprise, and many couldn’t react fast-enough! The motion failed.

4. Item 9. Election of non-statutory officers. When balloting was closed, we went on to Item 10, while the Teller’s Committee tallied the electronic votes. Vote results, and Second & Third Round balloting were interspersed with the bylaw amendment procedures.

5. Item 11. Joe Neglia moved to reject the Proposed Bylaw Amendments consent calendar. Presider Gage objected to the motion’s validity, claiming it was an attempt to reject an entire class of individual amendments at one time. His argument was invalid, because as long as they were part of the consent calendar, they were not a class of individual amendments!  They were the one consent calendar, which by rule is voted-on as one item. But . . . Of course! it was an attempt to reject all of them! just not as individual amendments. . . . He finally conceded the point, but, we did not prevail.

[At some point, it became apparent that our quorum may be lost. The committee counted the counties, but there was no attempt to count the members present, in-person and by proxy! If there was no longer a quorum, the meeting should have been adjourned!]

    5.1. Tim Horn, Jim Dutton, and other members, called for certain amendments to be pulled from the consent calendar as special preference items, per Rules 5.B&C.
    5.2. With the items pulled, the Presider suddenly asked if there was any objection to accepting the consent calendar. This, too, was done too quickly, without due deliberation to allow the members to catch-up. In the next breath, he declared the calendar accepted without the required voice vote! Rule 5.B. states: “. . . the consent calendar items . . . will be voted on en masse.”

6. Item 12. Bylaw Amendment special preference items that were pulled from the calendar. Due to the time, with no objection, Presider Gage determined we would debate and vote on the items in groups of three. As mentioned above, Letter “D,” as written, actually could have been used to nullify Robert’s Rules! Three of us spoke against it. (For the result, see below.)
    6.1 Presider Gage ordererd balloting for the next Round of Election Voting, and Amendments B.C.&D, to begin electronically. He then began debate on the next amendment.

7. I realized it was out of order to debate the next items while balloting was occurring! And, I realized that Rule 8.A, required a voice vote on the amendments! [Why did they want to vote on the amendments electronically? It was easier to vote the proxies that way!]

8. I began my point of order; challenging:  1. Debating during balloting, and, 2. Voting on the amendments electronically. I raised the point of order repeatedly while being ignored for several minutes, as the Presider and others conferred on the dais; then I debated the Presider. Jim Dutton cut-in to move to table further action on the Bylaw Amendments. He was shutdown by Presider Gage because my point of order was still open. (We didn’t know that a point of order yields to a motion to lay the main question on the table.)
Presider Gage finally acknowledged my points were valid: 1. Debate during balloting was out of order, and, 2. Rule 8.A. did govern the amendment voting, so electronic balloting was out of order.

    8.1 As soon as he acknowledged these facts, I quickly reiterated Jim Dutton’s Motion to Table Further Action on the Bylaw Amendments. I heard my Fellow-LD25 SC, Jacque Wilson, Second—with Warp-Speed! Presider Gage argued the point and wouldn’t allow the motion, while he danced around verbally trying to decide what to do. I began to press for the motion to be called, reminding him that it was moved and seconded, and he had to call for a vote.

[Bylaws Committee Chair Kathy Petsas had repeatedly been allowed to take the floor just to indignantly remind us how much effort the committee had put-into the amendments. When she did it while I was at the microphone arguing parliamentary truths for all of us, I called, “Mr. Chairman, Point of Order! Emotional appeals are out of order!” He and she were speechless. I was told afterward that my Fellow-SCs told her to sit-down, and she did. . . .]

NOTE: The crucial difference between Constitutional Conservatives and Progressive/Collectivists of any Party Label is the polar opposites: Logic and Reason v. Emotion!]

Gage demanded that the votes taken on the three amendments be counted. I should not have agreed, but did. (But, it worked-out well to know the results. See below.)

He agreed to call the question on the Motion to Table Further Action on the Bylaw Amendments!

Our Fellow-SCs were ready to take the ball and run with it! When the voice vote was taken, it was obvious the Ayes had it!!! Presider Gage had to admit the motion carried. No further action could be taken on the remaining Bylaw Amendments! They were dead!

The results of voting on Amendments B,C&D, were announced: All three were defeated!

Bylaw Summary:

1. The consent calendar holding the unpulled Proposed Bylaw Amendments, was wrongfully accepted. Because there was NO VOTE taken!
2. The amendments pulled as special preference items ALL died on the table!

Results of the Third Round of voting for officers were read. Presider Gage called for a Motion to Adjourn. The motion carried. Items 13&14, Resolutions and New Business, were left unheard!

Praise the LORD! for helping us to begin to take-back our Party!

For Liberty!
Itasca

Without Liberty, FREEDOM cannot exist!

LIBERTY begins in our own BACKYARD!

[Itasca Small]

Mike,

From my perspective, SPI Diane Douglas has betrayed the People of Arizona many times; the most visible beginning being when she chose not to pursue Gov Ducey's blatant usurpation of judicial power, and of the state-level executive office of state supt. of public instruction's authority and power, in Jan. '15.

Everything that has happened since is fruit of the poisonous tree stemming from Gov Ducey's usurpation and SPI Douglas' refusal to fight it constitutionally.

Getting the words on paper that say she ended Common Core in Arizona, means nothing when the Truth is, she turned against Arizona's Children in the fight against Common Core; championing the Dog and Pony Show instigated by Gov Ducey in apparent collusion with other Republican Governors who are not Constitutionalists, to "Review and Replace" the Common Core Standards one at a time—apparently fully intending to entrench not eradicate the Evil that is Common Core!!!

[Also called, "Smoke & Mirrors!" See Breitbart News, April, '15]

In December, '16, she shattered all remaining hope that she was on-track to do what she had promised Arizona's Children!  [I have to acknowledge that she never said she could get rid of Common Core alone, which does not excuse her subsequent actions in pursuing and championing Gov Ducey's "Directive."]  She clearly declared her support of Arizona's Second Rebrand of Common Core, and her indignation that we were opposed to it!

In my informed opinion, her campaign since that time, claiming to have ended Common Core in Arizona, is full of blatant "untruths!"

For Liberty!

Itasca

Without Liberty, FREEDOM cannot exist!

LIBERTY begins in our own BACKYARD!

[Bruce M Piepho]

 

Itasca,  I know there is a lot that can and should be done now.  Have you talked to your state Senator and 2 representatives.  I have and continue to do so.  Good to teach the RRO basics.  As to the HB2012 bill - 2 points.  1. I know all about the striker option.  We used it in various stages of getting a COS resolution passed.  2.  The Legislator web page for Bill Status frustrates me.  I suspect the dates are generated.  As I am positive the second reading did not take place today or yesterday.

McCain is still in AZ and should retire.  Fake Flake is for all practical purposes gone.  You can do an analysis of the Conservative, Moderates, RINOs and Constitutional Conservatives, if you want.  I am focusing on the Deep State or Permanent State or Administrative State.  Have you gone to the Conservative Review and looked at McSally's "F" ranking based on her voting record compared to the CR perspective?

Joe Neglia did an excellent job of learning the RRO and challenging the presider.  But it was not a major victory from my old warrior perspective.  The RRO confrontation was a skirmish that the proxy limit of 2 per holder was lost in before the dust settled.  I agree:

We must not let the dynamic die!  We are in the right, and God is with Us!

[Itasca Small]

Bruce, Yes, thank you!  I assuredly have talked with my state senator and representatives, and have talked with and/or communicated with many other legislators.

In 2016, I wrote a proposed bill, and with a group of citizen lobbyists, submitted and argued for it to the legislators and SPI Douglas; it would have constitutionally resolved the SPI/SBE controversy.  But, the SPI, and Republican Leadership—reportedly at the behest of Gov Ducey—did not want it considered, as they all just moved inexorably toward the sought-after and agreed-to evisceration of our office of SPI.

It's admirable that you're an active citizen lobbyist!  I only mentioned strikers, because you said the time to drop new legislation had passed.

The Legislature's Web-site has many features that leave much to be desired.  The previous iteration was much easier to learn.  The Bill Status Page shows the chronology of the bills.  [The bill was dropped into the Hopper.  The bills in the Hopper were given numbers.]  Then,  1) Each bill must have its number and title read on the Floor by a House Clerk; this is the required "First Read," it occurred on 1/09/18.  2) Also, on 1/09/18, the bill was then assigned to committees: Government and Rules.  3) On 1/10/18, the bill's number and title were read on the Floor by a House Clerk to meet the requirement for the "Second Read."  4) It then was put on the Government Committee's Agenda for 2/1/18, at which hearing it was HELD.  5) It was put on the Government Committee's Agenda for 2/8/18, at which hearing it was moved from committee with a DO PASS Recommendation.  6) The last I checked it was not yet on the Rules Committee Agenda for 2/12/18; this is a sign it may be about to die, or that amendments are being discussed before it is brought to the COW for debate and voting on any Floor Amendments.

Your paragraph beginning "McCain . . ." does not contradict my dissertation on the GOPe and Constitutional Conservatives.  There are two factions at-work in our Nation. The Deep State, etc, is the not-so-underground-now wing of the faction that represents those of any political label who seek to destroy Our Nation under God, and the Constitution He inspired the Founding Fathers to create in the name of We, the People.  In which the People are Sovereign, lending the power to govern under the Rule of Law to a National, and State Governments designed to Protect Rights in a republican form, and leave a moral and religious People unmolested to live by the Principle of Self-Governance.

The other faction is We, the People who still fight for Principles set-forth in the Declaration of Independence, and laid as the Foundation of our Constitution for the united States of America.

There are no other factions.  We fight for Our Liberty under God, and they fight to enslave us under Oligarchic Tyranny!  Joe Biden should have pointed at himself and his ilk when he said of Republicans at a campaign rally:  "They're gonna put y'all back in chains!"  McCain, Flake, McSally, Ducey, etc, they're all on the side of Collectivist/Technocratic Tyranny, not Liberty!

Joe Neglia is a Liberty Warrior!  I'm sorry, I don't know why, if you don't see the victory in the times he and we got the presider to have to concede points of parliamentary procedure—culminating in shutting-down the bylaws amendment procedure—  I am the one who reiterated the Motion to Table first moved by Jim Dutton; I know what it took to get Gage to capitulate and allow the vote and carry the motion.  The SCs who voted to Table Any Further Action on Bylaws Amendments knew why we voted!

We, the Members of the State Committee present, voted to Table, and apparently everyone but I knew the proxy amendment was about to be laid on the Table!  Those who voted to Table had just heard Gage have to acknowledge that the votes on the three amendments we did vote on were out of order.  I believe those who overwhelmingly voted to Table knew it was a Major Victory!

This is a perfect illustration of why there should be no proxy voting allowed in a deliberative assembly.  Those deliberating in-person, in real-time, on the Floor of the Assembly, cast their votes as they knew was appropriate at that moment.  Those who sent proxies did not get a vote because it was a proper voice vote won by the voices of the majority of those in-attendance, as we knew what needed to be done in that moment.

It was a Major Victory to defeat them by stopping their out of order manipulations of parliamentary procedure! . . . An association is either one ruled by "law," or it is lawless; we revived the law in that Major Victory—Praise the LORD for the words and the courage He gave us ALL to stand for Our Rights!

What I don't understand is that some people only see the proxy amendment failing; they seem to have blinders-on that the other ones that went-down—had they passed—would have hog-tied our pseudo deliberative assembly for an unknown time to come!

Of what good is allowing a member to vote his own and two proxy votes if you've lost the right to participate freely by amending the bylaws and allowing manipulated parliamentary procedure, electronic voting, wrongly called voice votes, etc, to shutdown dissent?

God's Timing is Impeccable! I am reminded of Romans 8:28: "And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose." NKJV

I'm glad we agree:

We must not let the dynamic die!  We are in the right, and God is with Us!