It is my belief, maybe unwarranted, but I don’t think so, that we should model the state Republican Party after congress, as much as feasible.

In congress, a senator cannot send in a page to cast a vote for themselves. Neither can a House member. (They both elect their own committee chairs, also.)

Why are we allowing proxies at SOME levels of the state party? I say some, for they have been disallowed, as clearly spelled out by Ms. Petsas, “appointed” by Chairman Lines, in one of her missives, that they would not be allowed in our, no, actually their, bylaw committee meetings. Which brings up yet another question: Why the double standard? About proxies, I mean. Could it be about control? Just asking….

Back to the concept of proxies: I could almost buy the idea of a proxy if there were a valid reason for someone, at the last minute, being unable to attend. I said, almost. But to go out and gather proxies to control an election? No way. Which is exactly what has been going on. Think about how much effort is put into taking 100 or more proxies to a meeting! How is that actually accomplished? The highest number I have had reported to me was 103, I personally had someone tell me they were carrying 44, and he appeared proud of the fact that he had the 44.

Can anyone honestly tell me that within a district that there were 103 people that had some sort of calamity that caused them to not be able to attend? Or even 44? Give me a break! More than likely, these people just don’t give a hoot about what we do. Should they even be registered to vote, is the real question. Numbers like these are nothing more than blatant efforts to manipulate election results, period. Think again, how much effort would go into what, signing up a PC, and getting their proxy, when as likely is the case, they have little to no interest in our party – at all. Although,, I will certainly give those that come with 103 proxies an “A” for effort, they have figured out how to rig the game in their favor!

Consider our last election for just the position of Chairman. There were 34 votes separating Lines and O’Connor. Which means our election was in the hands of two people! Either the one with 44 proxies or the one with 103 proxies absolutely controlled the election. It was totally up to them who was our next chairman! Does this sound fair? I don’t think so.

Setting aside the fact that the credentials committee very likely could not validate those proxies as actually legitimate, I AM NOT accusing anyone of anything by way of rigging our elections. The rules are the rules, and we currently allow proxies. So be it. Dumb as the practice is.

BUT, when the bylaws committee disallows proxies, when they cannot even elect our own bylaws committee chair, when the meeting is closed to non committee members, when we are told that we cannot make our own recording of these meetings, when no recording is even being done by Ms. Petsas herself, when we are dictated to about which sections of the bylaws are to be reviewed, when we are refused contact information between committee members, etc., etc., etc., well, there is definitely opportunity for skulduggery to be going on. I have asked (and NOT received) the minutes of the first bylaws committee meeting. As a member of the bylaws committee that chose not to attend, I should have a right to those minutes...assuming they have been kept, of course. (Maybe I have alienated Ms. Petsas. That might be a reason, ya think?)

Is ANY congressional hearings, other than when national security issues are involved, being conducted in this manner? Don’t think so. At least any that I can think of. It would do well for our state party to rise above the suspicions of manipulation and demonstrate that they are above this sort of behavior. Doing away with proxies would be a good start. So would allowing committees to elect their own chair, but I digress. Again.

Views: 57

Replies to This Discussion

I concur
I agree with Russell. We wonder why we have trouble recruiting PCs. This is a big reason. How can we justify this abuse of proxies when they have never been to LD meetings and have no idea what being a PC means. Attendance at a certain number of District meetings should be a prerequisite for using a proxy, if we allow them at all. Personally, I think there should be no proxies. If they don't allow them in Congress, we shouldn't either. We are voting on important matters that should require each of us to understand what's being voted on. PCs who don't attend or participate would seemingly not have the information needed to vote.

Our state legislators don't get proxies either, I don't believe.





NOTE:  Blog posts cannot be blasted to the membership.  Post in Opinions if you want your post to be blasted out.

Post on the correct tab that matches your topic.

Keep it brief and to the point.

Use the proper spelling and punctuation.

Please include the link to your source for the information you post.

Do not attack your fellow conservatives.

If you wouldn't say it to your mother, think twice before saying it here.

Follow these rules!


Suppose the earth and its inhabitants exist in order to identify just what causes mankind continually to suffer so many troublesome problems and afflictions.



© 2023   Created by Arizona Freedom Alliance.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service