SEE UPDATE AT BOTTOM
I just got off the phone with Assemblywoman Mimi Walters, Honorary co-chair of the Protect Our Homes Initiative, after an email she sent out tonight asking for support in urging the California Republican Party to do the right thing.
Property rights are a fundamental ideal in this nation, a basic right which has historically set the United States apart from many other countries. Or so we thought until the Supreme Court’s Kelo decision.
That decision is perhaps another glaring example of just how confused we have become as a nation about basic rights and core freedoms. Even so, it should come as no surprise to anyone that the Republican Party would not be swayed by such confusion, and that the membership of the California Republican Party, in convention last month, would support Proposition 90, the Protect Our Homes Initiative. In so doing, the CRP resolution made it clear that printed literature the Party disseminates for the November election include the Yes on 90 position.
There was nothing in the resolution to indicate "only if the CRP gets money from the Yes on Prop 90 campaign to do so."
As much as all of that should come as no surprise, the reso apparently was not passed, as much as it was referred to a committee, where in some inexplicable procedural move it got lost in the CRP bureaucracy. Clearly not the wishes of the CRP membership, which overwhelmingly and vehemently supports Prop 90.
As Assemblywoman Walters just told me, it’s a fundamental issue for the CRP. Republicans should want this issue on our literature. "This is what we’re all about as a Party," she said. "This is what America is about…owning your own home and being able to protect your property."
Exactly. Hey, I’m the first to understand the CRP has to raise the money to put out literature. I get it. But, let’s not make any bones about it, the CRP has raised and will continue to raise the money, and will mail literature statewide, with or without Prop 90 included. The CRP should not be exacting tens of thousands of dollars out of another entity to advocate for an issue so core to our beliefs as Republicans that…well, lets face it…it’s a no brainer.
Please join me in asking the CRP to live up to its membership’s wishes.
Read the significant portion of the email from Mimi, and please do as she asks:
I am writing to ask you to contact the Board of Directors to express your desire that they direct CRP staff and vendors to follow the wishes and direction provided by the delegates … and include an affirmative position on Proposition 90 on all printed materials paid for by the CRP for the November election.
The Board of Directors is scheduled to meet this Friday, September 22, so please act soon to make your wishes known. Their emails are listed on the CRP’s website, www.cagop.org. Just click on the “About the GOP” button.
Private property rights are one of the fundamental platforms of our Party and one of the foundations of our U.S. Constitution. Let’s make sure our voters know that the CRP is proudly on the side of property rights.
Sincerely,
MIMI WALTERS
Member of the Assembly – 73rd District
Honorary Chair, YES on 90
*******
UPDATE: Email from Tom Hudson to Mimi Walters….
Dear Assemblywoman Walters,
As a technical matter, I believe you are incorrect. The California Republican Party did NOT pass the resolution from which you quote.
The bizarre and undemocratic procedure enforced by Chairman Duf Sundheim did not permit the California Republican Party State Central Committee to vote on ANY resolutions concerning the
November ballot measures. All such resolutions were referred to the Initiatives Committee, chaired by Mike Spence (who I have copied on this note). That Committee adopted recommendations on each ballot measure, but did not approve or discuss ANY resolutions. That Committee did not even prepare a list of reasons for any of the positions that it took. As you may recall, State Central Committee members were not even permitted to discuss individual items in the Initiatives Committee report. This procedure stands in marked contrast to the great traditions of our State Central Committee.
Therefore, because the California Republican Party Rules are deeply flawed and in need of amendment (or more sensible interpretation), there was no opportunity for the California Republican Party to adopt your resolution or even discuss the language of your resolution. Despite the near unanimous wishes of State Central Committee members and rank and file Republican voters, there is no requirement for CRP literature to contain a declaration of support of Proposition 90.
Of course, the California Republican Party is nevertheless free to spend its resources promoting Proposition 90, regardless of the lack of any specific resolution or directive to that effect. Our members certainly endorsed that initiative and it would be insane for us not to say so and explain why. Unfortunately, it appears that the CRP leadership is attempting to waste scarce resources on advertising in favor of Proposition 1B and 1E instead, which your own local Orange County Republican Party has opposed (and my own Placer County Republican Party opposed unanimously, after a thorough debate).
Please let me know what I can do to assist you in the effort to get the CRP to spend resources promoting Proposition 90 instead of "Yes on Proposition 1B" and "Yes on Proposition 1E" (which
virtually all Republicans oppose, except those who work under Susan Kennedy).
Tom Hudson
Member, California Republican Party State Central Committee
Member, Placer County Republican Central Committee
Vice President, California Republican Assembly
Executive Director, California Taxpayer Protection Committee
P.S. In case you are interested, I have attached a resolution submitted to the California Republican Party by Board of Equalization member Bill Leonard in opposition to Proposition 84
(the Democrats’ Flood, Water, and Everything-But-the-Kitchen-Sink Bond). As you can see, that resolution contains language authorizing the CRP "officers, employees, and volunteers to take whatever actions the Board of Directors and Executive Committee may deem necessary to assist the opposition campaign, consistent with the Bylaws of the California Republican Party." It is shameful that State Central Committee members were not permitted to discuss this resolution or the initiative that inspired it.