A Look at the Republican Change Committee … and a Question
So back in January, I heard about this group that was forming with a goal of changing the RPV. They were calling themselves the “Republican Change Committee” (RCC). Like all rumors, I didn’t know if it was a group who wanted to really change anything, or just change it so they could have more control over the RPV. The information I have learned since has led me to believe it’s a little of the former, for the purpose of the latter.
Hear me out … this is not one of Andrea’s articles just to point out yet another obvious issue. This is both dangerous and important. While I do think it’s long past time that the party stop killing itself from within, this proposal is, in my opinion, the most covert attempt yet at ending the division by ending a large part of the RPV. That is not my intention with this article to further the divide, but unless and until those people in the rank and file demand better, actions such as this plan will prevail to the detriment of those very folks. I am a sucker for daylight showing what needs to be seen, and I firmly believe you should see the whole picture.
Obviously, I have formed my opinion about this (that you’ll see in my notes on the links below) but this is one of those situations where I think it’s best to let you review the information and be your own judge. If you don’t read the links, you will not understand why I think the RCC proposal is a bad idea, or the honest question I will ask you to consider at the end.
Recently, Mr. Fredy Burgos sent an email about the recent SCC vote for the State Convention to be held on August 15, 2020, as an unassembled convention with a voting location in each CD. He lost his bid for the 11th District Chairmanship, so that might explain the tenor of the email. His email is below:
However, that is no excuse for his level of bullshit, but it begins to explain what I see as the reason for the RCC proposal he wants you to support, even though he spends almost no time on the proposal itself.
UPDATED: I suppose he’s a tad more than angry … onward.
The next document (below) appears to be the notes from one of the first RCC meetings in January. I couldn’t believe its true purpose was explained so well. I have no idea who’s handwriting it is, but it seems plain the purpose was to “Revamp” the RPV State Party Plan, and stand “Against Chairman Jack Wilson”.
I suppose my original article hit a nerve with someone, as the Scribd document with the handwritten notes from the January 7th CD meeting is gone. Someone recognized their writing, called the editor to have a fit, and it was removed. As a side note if anyone cares… If you scan a paper and send it out into the world of the internet (especially to anyone in politics) with no privacy disclosure, that material is no longer really private, IMHO. That document proved the others in this article, using a human’s writing.
The handwritten notes are important for a few reasons. They show the organizational intent and the first members of the Republican Change Committee. On the page, the following was listed:
Bring New Voters
SCC Rules, Re-vamp the Party Plan
Stand Against Jack Wilson for RPV Chairman
As for the membership, in the center of the page, was
Beneath his name it said:
Republican Change Committee, followed by the following names:
As for the “new voters,” I think they would have saved themselves time had someone just picked up a phone. Chairman Wilson has been on a continual registration drive since he took over for former Chairman Whitbeck in September of 2018. The RPV has registered a lot of new people in that time.
And then in March, I received the following email. It’s a partial of the minutes from the January meeting of the 7 th CD, where Mr. Fred Gruber explained the plans of the RCC a bit further.
But I kept thinking, I want details…where is this revolutionary plan? Then I saw it, and I wished I had never asked.
As I’m sure most of you know, the SCC is a large group that is supposed to be representative of all republicans in Virginia. If it were up to me, every unit chair, and the Auxiliary club reps would be on the SCC and there would be no congressional district specific members necessary, and no proxies would be allowed. But the grand plan of this RCC was to REDUCE the number of SCC members. After some of the gamesmanship I have seen, the only conclusion that makes sense to me is that if the SCC is smaller, it’s easier to lobby for anything, even if you’re lobbying against the Party Plan. The SPP Amendment this Change Committee wants to make will gut the RPV SCC and only further empower those who are already abusing it.
Anyway … because two of the documents mention Mark Daniel as a Chair of this RCC, I sent him an email to ask if it was true. He said:
“I was asked to chair it, but busy with my own unit, declined to do so. Today, there are approximately 78 voting members, many are elected by the body itself, which lends the State central committee to at times be heavily influenced by internal forces rather than the rank and file members of our party. My contribution, was to ask that it be ensured that if the voting membership were cutback to approximately 50, the groups with three members currently, be included with a number that either kept their voting strength the same, or increased proportionately. We have not won a State wide Office, in over 10 years, if we continue to do what we are doing , we will always be what we are. I don't accept the status quo, and propose we aggressively go on the offense, and win our State back.”
Mr. Daniel apparently sees the problem I have with the SCC being influenced from within. We differ in how to fix that. I prefer making it larger. Here is their plan, with their changes highlighted … and a couple of my notes.
On a parallel front is the RPV Chairman’s contest to be decided at the August 15, 2020, State Convention along with this “plan” to gut the RPV’s Governing Board. I mention this now only because Mr. Shoelwer is the candidate the change committee recruited to support their plan.
I have read his campaign letters, and I understand campaigns. However, even to win an election, his letters should be minimally fact checked. I am not convinced, based on what I have seen thus far, that he really understands the fundamental purpose of the RPV Governing Documents, yet he is the champion of this amendment. But I digress.
The purpose of this article is the Plan amendment above that these people want the delegates to support. I will provide my analysis on the candidates when I have learned about all three … but not today, save one unavoidable point:
The ability to clearly articulate the consequences of issues such as this RCC Plan is monumentally important if you ever want a Republican to win statewide in Virginia again. Mr. Schoelwer is the candidate the architects of the Plan recruited. The second candidate, Mr.
Anderson, has not made up his mind.
So, last week, RPV Chairman Jack Wilson sent a letter of his own, asking (apparently again) for all candidates to make their positions clear about the amendment the Republican Change Committee has put forth. His letter is below.
Now, if you have read these documents with an open mind (even with my rather strong opinions), I think there is a chance that you will also see how a small group turns into whatever the RCC is … and I have a question I believe is important.
In light of the plans of the Republican Change Committee, should one of those “C”s be … Control?
The future success of Elephant Clan campaigns in Virginia is tied to the answer, and how it is handled by the SCC.