Cabarrus Cheap Seats

When I read that the leadership of the Men’s Club decided to fold the organization, I was disappointed and outraged at the same time. Disappointed in a lack of leadership; the “I didn’t get my way, so I’m taking my ball and going home” attitude. Outraged at a lack of disrespect for the rules.

A number of you will recall that I wrote the bylaws for the organization. In no way do I have the wisdom that Madison had when he wrote the US Constitution. However, I did my best and it was a good start.

I submitted the draft of the Men’s Club Constitution (I may use the term bylaws too) at the March, 2007 meeting. At the April meeting, the floor was opened to discussion. The only comment was complimentary, so it was submitted to be ratified at the May meeting. Ratification occurred and we were abiding by it for several months, or at least in theory.

So, since I wrote the document, I will make a few points:

The bylaws clearly state that the organization complies with Federal, State, and local laws. In addition, the organization is to uphold the NC Federation of Republican Men (NCFRM) and Robert’s Rules of Order (current edition). Thus, if an issue is not addressed in the bylaws of the Men’s Club or NCFRM, the Robert’s Rules is the authority.

The meeting where the membership voted to remove Mr. Privette from office was official and in good standing. A motion was made, seconded, discussion, and voted. Mr. Dover tried to ignore the motion and was out of order in several instances, most particularly when he left. Moreover, Mr. Thibault was in the right to assume order and proceed. Therefore, where some may disagree with the outcome, everything was “by the book.”

A few weeks ago, the Board of Directors took it upon them to disband the organization. As Mr. Thibault has pointed out, this is out of order and Robert’s Rules dictate the steps are to be followed. This is to be done at a January meeting. In addition, Mr. Sid Rauch has proposed several amendments to the current bylaws and they are to be discussed at the January meeting.

I have read, re-read, and re-re-read Mr. Rauch’s amendments. In addition, he and I have exchanged emails regarding my thoughts to his changes. I commend him for his actions in wanting to improve the document. However, I cannot endorse all that he has written.

Before I proceed, let me make this clear. My draft was/is not the perfect document. So any changes that are proposed are not taken personally. Any objections that I have are not because my ego has been bruised but upon my beliefs.

One of the things I’ve tried to do was keep the identity of the Men’s Club separate from the Republican Party. While the Men’s Club fosters the ideals of the Republican Party, it has the right to make its own decisions whether agreeing or disagreeing with the Party and the leaders (leaders being elected and non-elected officials). In addition, the Men’s Club should be able to provide a forum for open discussion and debate. That is what I always pictured the organization to be. I did not want the organization to become the cheerleading section for a small group of individuals verbally assaulting those who disagreed with them. Sadly, that occurred on several occasions.

Over the last few weeks, I have engaged in some deep thinking. Should the club be separate from the local party? The tying knot between the two is that the Chair of the Men’s Club has a seat on the local Party’s executive board. Moreover, what is the purpose of the club? To foster Republican ideals which is very much like the Party’s purpose.

Having said all of this (excuse the rambling), there are a few amendments that I will propose to change, that is change Mr. Rausch’s amendments.

First, I propose to change Article VIII, Section 2 – Endorsements. Mr. Rausch’s motion reads, “The CCRMC may only endorse those candidates properly endorsed by the Cabarrus County Republican Party.” I understand the intention of the rule meaning the Men’s Club should remain impartial, especially during a primary. However, when you look at the “letter of the law”, one can argue that the Men’s Club cannot endorse or support candidates at the local, state, or district convention. For example, if the candidate(s) nominated for office by the nominating committee is not the choice of the Men’s Club, then they are forbidden to endorse or state their opinion. This rule seems to limit participation by the Men’s Club in county, state, or district conventions. Therefore, I will make an amendment to allow the Men’s Club the opportunity to voice its opinion freely at conventions even if the opinion is not “properly endorsed by the Cabarrus County Republican Party.”

Next, I see no need for the section detailing the items on the agenda for each meeting. There is no need to call upon each person. I’m just using the old axiom KISS – Keep is Simple Sweety.

Finally, I cannot support the idea that the Men’s Club has to follow all directives from the Cabarrus County Republican Party. The two organizations should work together to promote the Republican ideals, there is no need for the Men’s Club to be subservient to the Party. Likewise, I believe the Men’s Club should be able to endorse (vocally and financially) candidates and organizations of their choosing. However, the membership must vote upon any contribution over $25 to a candidate or organization (political and non-political) by a 2/3 majority vote. Therefore, I plan to submit an amendment to this section.

I’ve written a great deal of thoughts. This post was to get the ball rolling… to get others involved. Comments are welcome. Most importantly, come out to the January meeting of the Men’s Club. I know there are several individuals who want to see the organization grow and prosper. 2008 will be one of the most important elections in my lifetime. The elections are too important to allow personal judgments and agendas to get in the way of progress.

As always, I thank Mr. Thibault for the opportunity to express my concerns and start the discussion.

See you in January!

-Mark