Right now the Nebraska Republican Presidential Primary is simply a beauty contest since no delegates to the national convention are elected as a result of it. What the primary does is indicate whom those voters who take the time to go to the polls want as their next president. But, those results are in no way binding on the actual election of delegates which occurs at the Republican State Convention.The Republican National Convention is pondering a change contained in Rule 12 and this is what the revised rule would be:
RULE NO. 12
Amendments
The Republican National Committee may, by three-fourths (3/4) vote of its entire membership, amend Rule Nos. 1-11 and 13-25. Any such amendment shall be considered by the Republican National Committee only if it was passed by a majority vote of the Standing Committee on Rules after having been submitted in writing at least ten (10) days in advance of its consideration by the Republican National Committee and shall take effect thirty (30) days after adoption. No such amendment shall be adopted after September 30, 2014.
RULE NO. 16 (formerly 15)
Election, Selection, Allocation, or Binding of Delegates and Alternate Delegates
(a) Binding and Allocation.
(1) Any statewide presidential preference vote that permits a choice among candidates for the Republican nomination for President of the United States in a primary, caucuses, or a state convention must be used to allocate and bind the state's delegation to the national convention in either a proportional or winner-take-all manner, except for delegates and alternate delegates who appear on a ballot in a statewide election and are elected directly by primary voters.
(2) For any manner of binding or allocating delegates permitted by these rules, no delegate or alternate delegate who is bound or allocated to a particular presidential candidate may be certified under Rule No. 20 if the presidential candidate to whom the delegate or alternate delegate is bound or allocated has, in consultation with the state party, disavowed the delegate or alternate delegate.
The rule, if adopted would basically require the winner of the Nebraska Republican Presidential Primary to receive at least the same proportion of delegates as he or she received in the primary.
By adopting such a rule Nebraska's Republican Presidential Primary would become relevant. Yes, the votes cast by citizens in the primary would actually mean something as delegates to the Republican National Convention would be allocated in a manner to at least assure the winner the same percentage of delegates as votes cast, if not all of them.
Two reasons instantly come to mind as reasons to adopt this beyond allowing the will of the citizens to be reflected in the delegate allocation:
- By making the primary relevant, potential Republican presidential candidates would actually have a reason to come to the state, to spend money advertising here--Nebraska offers about 35 potential delegates for any presidential candidate at the national convention.
- By making the primary relevant and rewarding the winner of it there would be no way for others to hijack the delegation, an effort that the Ron Paul folks made in 2008 and 2012 and will no doubt try again in 2016 when Ron is gone and Rand becomes their likely candidate.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Patrick McPherson is co-editor of the Objective Conservative and a frequent contributor
6 comments:
Great idea! So be consistent I suppose you are in favor of the popular vote to determine presidency??? Wait
The weak and irrelevant in power, like yourself, will predictably turn to socialism's friend Democracy when your feeble attempts at holding onto power only increase the speed at which it abandons you. You have shown yourself time and time again to be nothing more than establishment shill and your price to pay shall be a complete loss of power in politics. You will be forced to retreat to this petty little blog and eventually your name will be forgotten.
Let it be known when you could and should have stood up for something decent and honorable you chose the cowardice route!
For the anonymous individual who charged the author, who wrote the article under his name, with cowardice, let me say this not so subtly: What is truly cowardice is to charge someone anonymously with that epithet when you don't have the courage, decency, or intestinal fortitude to leave your own! You must be a Democrat!!!!
Please tell me, when a majority of people within a State vote for a particular candidate for President and that candidate clearly wins the primary, how can our delegation represent the people of our State when our delegates align themselves with another candidate who did not receive the majority of the vote? This is not representing the people of our State.
Might I point out that your point fell flat on its face when you did not have... how did you put it? "you don't have the courage, decency, or intestinal fortitude to leave your own!" Moron.
Let's get rid of caucusing and county conventions then! Let's just simply base our electoral votes on the results of the popular vote in the primary. In fact, why have an electoral college at all? Let's just base our election on the results of the popular vote in the general election as well. There was a reason and purpose for the process. We are NOT a democracy! I feel much more comfortable choosing representation based on caucusing and well thought out and discussed positions from individuals who are engaged enough in the process to get elected on their own merit, than trusting the popular vote of people who are easily swayed by public opinion and outside $$$. Just my opinion. I choose bottom up over top down.
Post a Comment