Yesterday the Republican State Central Committee chose a primary over party convention as our method for choosing a Republican nominee for President next year. Prior to the vote the committee voted to make the primary/convention vote a secret ballot.[read_more] Many of us opposed a secret ballot on the convention/primary vote because those on State Central represents US. We elected them and we have a right to know if they are representing us when they vote. We can assume that those who voted for a secret ballot were those who were about to vote for a primary. Even in cases where that was not the case, those who voted for a secret ballot voted to not allow us to know how they vote when the represent us. Below is the vote for a roll call or a secret ballot on the convention/primary vote:
(y=roll call; n=secret ballot)
NAME | VOTE |
Mike Thomas | No |
Morton Blackwell | Yes |
Kathy Hayden | No |
Rich Nilsen | Yes |
Pete Snyder | Yes |
Eric Herr | Yes |
Curtis Colgate | No |
Chris Stearns | Yes |
Jack Wilson | No |
Lynn Tucker | No |
Wendell Walker | No |
Fred Gruber | Yes |
Mark Kelly | Yes |
Adam Tolbert | No |
Jo Thoburn | Yes |
Terry Wear | No |
Kasha Nielsen | No |
Dan Webb | No |
Linda Bartlett | No |
Jackson Miller | Yes |
Bryce Reeves | No |
Kevin Gentry | No |
Juanita Ballenger | No |
Al Aiken | Yes |
Suzanne Curran | Yes |
Steve Albertson | Yes |
Jeanine Lawson | Yes |
Larry Kile | Yes |
Allen Webb | Yes |
Carol Dawson | Yes |
Roger E. Miles | Yes |
Carl Anderson | Yes |
Cheryl Hargrove | Yes |
Stephen Corazza | No |
Barbara Tabb | No |
Stephen Thomas | Yes |
Chip Muir | No |
Steve Trent | No |
Bill Flanagan | No |
Rick Michael | No (changed from yes during tabulation) |
Bob Wheeler | No |
Carol de Triquet | No |
Renee Maxey | Yes |
Chris Shores | Yes |
Peyton Knight | Yes |
Clara Wheeler | No |
Travis Witt | Yes |
Georgia Alvis-Long | No |
Mickey Mixon | Yes |
Joseph Sonsmith | Yes |
Gene Rose | Yes |
Anne Fitzgerald | Yes |
Jane Ladd | No |
Doug Rogers | No |
Marie Quinn | No |
Kristi Way | No |
David Fuller | No |
Noah Wall | Yes |
Anne LeHuray | Yes |
Matthew Burrow | Yes |
Kevin Corbett | No |
Michelle Jenkins | No |
Marcy Hernick | No |
Jerry Lester | No |
Susan Edwards | Abstain |
Heidi Stirrup | Yes |
Julie Williams | Yes |
Mark Berg | Yes |
Kaye Gunter | Yes |
Eve Marie Barner Gleason | Yes |
Keith Damon | Abstain |
Patsy Drain | No |
David Ray | Yes |
Devon Flynn | No |
Jake Lee | No |
Mike Wood | Yes |
Jeff Wernsing | Yes |
Elizabeth “Jenny” Mundy | No |
Jimmie Massie | No |
John Cosgrove | No |
“Nicky Miller” | No |
UPDATE: Note we don’t know how or whether Chairman Whitbeck or Secretary Diana Banister voted, or whether the final reported totals were precise. But the above reflects the votes that were captured on an audio recording of the vote. (A BIG Thank You to reader Aaron Moyer for this!!)
I am so proud of 10th district representatives who all voted to cast their votes in public so we could know how our representatives represent us. It’s the least they could do. If Congress can stand up and make their votes public why can’t our State Central Committee members? Why are they hiding behind a secret ballot?
65 comments
Senator Bryce Reeves did not attend the SCC meeting. He sent his proxy, Senator Steve Martin.
I wanted to find out how each district fell out.
1
Congressional Allen Webb
Yes
1
Presidential Hon. Carol G. Dawson
Yes
1
Jeanine Lawson
Yes
1
Larry Kile
Yes
1
Steve Albertson
Yes
1
District ChairmanEric
Herr
Yes
2
C.D. State Central
Rep.Roger E. Miles
Yes
2
Congressional Stephen Corazza
No
2
Carl Anderson
Yes
2
Cheryl Hargrove
Yes
2
District ChairmanCurtis
Colgate
No
3
Barbara Tabb
No
3
Chip Muir
No
3
Stephen Thomas
Yes
3
District ChairmanChris
Stearns
Yes
4
Congressional Bob Wheeler
No
4
Presidential Carole de Triquet
No
4
.Steve Trent
No
4
Col. Bill Flanagan Jr.
No
4
Rick Michael
No (changed from yes during tabulation)
4
District ChairmanJack
Wilson
No
5
Congressional Clara Wheeler
No
5
Presidential Travis Witt
Yes
5
Chris Shores
Yes
5
Peyton Knight
Yes
5
Renee Maxey
Yes
5
District ChairmanLynn
Tucker
No
6
Congressional Gene Rose
Yes
6
Georgia K. Alvis-Long
No
6
Joseph Sonsmith
Yes
6
Mickey Mixon
Yes
6
Presidential Anne J. Fitzgerald
Yes
6
District
ChairmanWendell Walker
No
7
Presidential Jane Ladd
No
7
Congressional David Fuller
No
7
Doug W. Rogers IV
No
7
Kristi Way
No
7
Marie F. Quinn
No
7
District Chairman Fred
Gruber
Yes
8
Anne LeHuray
Yes
8
Matthew Burrow
Yes
8
Noah Wall
Yes
8
District Chairman Mark
Kelly
Yes
9
Congressional Kevin Corbett
No
9
Presidential Marcy Hernick
No
9
Jerry M Lester
No
9
Michelle Jenkins
No
9
Susan Edwards
Abstain
9
District ChairmanAdam
Tolbert
No
10
Congressional Heidi Stirrup
Yes
10
Presidential Julie Williams
Yes
10
Eve Gleason
Yes
10
Kay Gunter
Yes
10
Mark Berg
Yes
10
District ChairmanJo
Thoburn
Yes
11
Hon. David C. Ray
Yes
11
Hon. Patsy Drain
No
11
Keith G. Damon
Abstain
11
District ChairmanTerry
Wear
No
CRFV ChairmanKasha Nielsen
No
CRFV First Vice-ChairmanDevon Flynn
No
CRFV Second Vice-ChairmanJake Lee
No
Eastern Vice ChairmanKevin Gentry
No
Eastern Vice ChairwomanJuanita Balenger
No
Finance ChairmanPete Snyder
Yes
First Vice ChairmanMichael E. Thomas
No
House Caucus St. Cen. Rep.Hon. Jimmie Massie
No
National CommitteemanMorton Blackwell
Yes
National CommitteewomanKathy Hayden
No
Senate Caucus St. Cen RepHon. John Cosgrove
No
StCen Caucus Rep.Hon. Bryce Reeves
No
StCen Caucus Rep.Hon. Jackson Miller
Yes
TreasurerRich Nilsen
Yes
VFRW PresidentLinda Bartlett
No
VFRW StCen Rep Miki Miller
No
VFRW StCen RepElizabeth “Jenny” Mundy
No
Western Vice ChairmanAl Aitken
Yes
Western Vice ChairwomanSuzanne Curran
Yes
YRFV President Dan Webb
No
YRFV StCen Rep Mike Wood
Yes
YRFV StCen RepJeff Wernsing
Yes
Wow Heather, this is great. Thank you for putting it together. It looks like our most solidly conservative districts are the 1st, 8th, and 10th. The problem children are the 4th, 6th, and 9th. The others are a mix. Very interesting!
Actually, other than District Chairman Fred Gruber, the 7th (Congressman Dave Brat) is a mess and not reflective of the constituents.
Anita, I could not agree with you more. I was VERY loud for years wanting Cantor out. I said it couldn’t get any worse. I was SO WRONG.
Does Jeanine ever criticize Democrats?
Not during primaries or intra-party debates.
To me something is grievously wrong with what I observed last Saturday. So Rick Michael is recorded in the official vote as voting “Aye” (done by Roll Call) for whether to have a Roll Call vote vs a Secret Ballot vote for Convention vs Primary. The totals of those voting YES or AYE was 40 and those voting NO was 39 giving the AYES to vote by Roll Call. There were 2 abstentions (which in my opinion should not have counted). Then Rick Michael while the votes were being tabulated (which took WAYYYYY too long, we did it in 2 minutes) suddenly, and not publicly, changes his vote which swings it the other way and now the NO’s have it. Stinks to me!
The abstentions did not count, it was as if the person was not attending the meeting. Tabulating took more time than it should have, was there a reason for that? Was it because Rick Michael couldn’t make up his mind? You have a right and reason to be suspicious.
Thanks Jeanine for exposing this. The whole compromise offered by Daniel Webb was a lie to begin with. The offer to have a convention in 2017 if we had a primary next year was a hoax as you can not bind a future SCC to that vote as they’ll likely be new members and they’ll still have to vote for a convention that year or a primary. Once again the conservatives got screwed but this time from some of their very own, like Mr. Michaels and his flip flop.
This list doesn’t make any distinction if a proxy voter was used.
I don’t have access to that list but we can presume the proxy voted as instructed by the seat holder.
YOU can assume that because that’s how you’ve been shown to handle your reporting. That’s not a safe assumption at all, and a very good reason why proxies shouldn’t be allowed.
if this was an unexpected question, then how would the proxy know what the actual seat holder would vote.
interesting point that proxies shouldn’t be allowed
There were several proxies from both sides of the debate. If proxies were not allowed, there might not have been a quorum present.
Mrs. Martin, I appreciate you making sure Del. Miller got credit for his yes vote for open roll call. While I am not pleased with his vote for a primary, I agree that he is a stand up guy who does not fit the typical B.S. politician mode.
It is my understanding that he is one of the few Republican officials from the Legislature who asked for a party run process this year for his own nomination battle.
Actually…. no. You do not have a right to know their vote if they decide to vote via secret ballot. Learn the rules.
(from my comment on a BD article)
Executive session and secret balloting is available thanks to our adoption of Roberts Rules of Order and available to any and all members of any committee or subcommittee across the entire party at any time by a simple majority vote. The minutes of the executive session portion of the SCC meeting can only be read and approved at a later executive session or upon lifting of the secrecy by the members of the SCC.
Is it transparent? No. Did the majority of the members present deem it necessary to discuss finances in private? Yes. Does that mean the finances are private? No. It just means the discussions, motions, and actions taken are.
If you don’t like it, perhaps an amendment to the State Party Plan is in order.
Yes, we understand it’s a rule but as you say it’s time to change that rule and shame on those voted for secret ballot.
jeanine, Robert’s Rules is pretty much the standard for all meetings everywhere. Yes, i’ve been to more relaxed meetings where Robert’s Rules were not necessary, but to get something on the record, Robert’s Rules is the way to go. Or you could go by court rules, but not everyone is a trial lawyer.
We, The People ALWAYS have the right to know how our elected REPRESENTATIVES vote!! Got it?!! We DON’T elect them because they’re cute or nice; they are to VOTE FOR US! We hold them to account!! Beg pardon, but they are NOT OUR BETTERS!
I completely understand where you’re coming from, and I agree with you that we have the right to know how our elected officials vote in government. Keep in mind that the Republican Party is not part of the government. It is a private institution that members join voluntarily. The party adheres to the State Party Plan. The State Party Plan dictates Roberts Rules as the parliamentary authority. Roberts Rules, in turn, allow for executive session and secret ballots. Like I said above, if that is something we, as a party, disagree with then we need to amend the State Party Plan. If you don’t trust your elected party officials to represent your interests regardless of the voting method, I suggest you replace them with someone more trustworthy.
This debate is no longer about “convention vs primary”. This debate needs to be about “transparency vs secrecy”! Every single individual that voted for a secret ballot should be challenged. I expect that leaders displace honesty, transparency, and the pride to stand firm and proud behind the decisions that they make. There is no excuse for this advocacy of secrecy and this failure in leadership. After this list has been verified for accuracy, ALL of these individuals that voted for a secret ballot need to be replaced!
[…] Unlike some of the loudest voices demanding an open, roll call vote, I am not a hypocrite. I want transparency all the time, and I would have supported an open roll call vote. I’m not afraid to defend what I believe in, and I’m used to taking shots from the same folks who will gleefully assist in the witch hunt that has already started. […]
Thank you so much for posting this secret ballot roll call, Jeanine/Bull Elephant!! We certainly do have the right to know how our SCC voted! Who was for transparency and who was NOT!
people are getting fed up with behind closed doors
people want to know how their representatives vote
people want to know how their leaders vote on different things
OPEN GOVERNMENT–FREE INFORMATION–THE TRUTH
All of the 1st distrist stayed united for a roll call vote.
The State Central Committee was short on spine this past weekend.
It was like pulling teeth to get these folks to take a roll call on anything yesterday. Folks were stubbornly bitching and complaining about how bad it could “damage the party” if their votes were made public. It wasn’t all that surprising, I suppose – but good grief. Our party’s leadership team contains a lot more cowards than I previously realized…
You are SO right! Sitting back in the Peanut Gallery, a lot of us were very unimpressed at the non-transparency of the SCC (I know there are exceptions and you’re one of them – thank you!)
Speaking of cowardliness and non-transparency – I laughed at the absurdity when a few of the chicken-hearted SCC actually wanted to have a secret vote on whether to hold a secret vote! LOL. Oh yes, this word needs to get OUT!
At least the vote that really counted went the right way – for a primary. Now let’s get on with the business of electing a President that will stop the destruction of the country.
Sure about this list? It has 40 “yes” votes and 39 “no” votes.
Also, be careful with assumptions, at least one “yes” vote was someone who spoke in advocacy of a primary. There’s no way to be sure who voted for convention or primary, unless you ask them.
I am having the list verified again. Yes, I am aware that we can’t know how someone voted by this list but we can know they voted to keep their vote a secret and that’s what I have a problem with.
Cool, just making sure the facts are correct. Only added my last paragraph because you said we can assume the “no” voters were about to vote for a primary.
In most instances we can but I know one person on the list who voted for an open vote and he made it no secret that he intended to vote for a primary. I respect that. Jackson Miller is a good man. He was willing to be open about his support for a primary. Too bad so many others did not agree with him.
Like TPP – all in secret. Let the sun shine through the darkness. Why hide your vote? Defend it.
Secret ballot =/= primary. All the legislators, for example, opposed a secret ballot. Most, if not all of them, also supported a primary.
Nope – unfortunately you are incorrect. Sorry to say Sen. Bryce Reeves vote FOR the secret ballot. Actually it was his proxy, but same thing.
As did Massie and Cosgrove. Only elected official to oppose the secrecy was Del Mark Berg and we’ve lost him come next year.
And wrong…..
Yes, I have Bryce Reeves as voting for the secret ballot. I know it seems backward but a no vote meant a secret ballot.
Wrong…
Wrong…..
Your responses are succinct, but not very edifying.
I bet it’s been one hell of a week for you, Jeanine! First the gays get equal treatment, Obamacare lives, then your own people vote for a primary. Thankfully for the rest of civilized society, you and your minority hold no position of authority to enact your radical agenda on the majority.
Huh? You have no idea how I feel about gays or much of anything else but thank you for your concern about me.
I too audio recorded the Roll Call vs Secrecy vote and it is correct.
I have learned that the abstentions count as a no votes and one yes vote on this list changed his mind. Those changes gave the win to the ‘no’ voters.
Gotcha, makes sense. Thanks for clearing it up.
You are most welcome.
Abstentions do not count either way, but they do effect the vote negatively by not counting towards the majority. The should not be counted as no votes when tallying, though.
Your screen name is great. Thank you for the clarification.
Thank you. Explanation behind my screen name is here:
https://disqus.com/home/discussion/bearingdrift/sorry_folks_2016_ought_to_be_a_convention8230/#comment-2088055952
Very interesting!
I don’t understand why abstentions would count as a no vote? Logically they would not count at all. Is this part of Robert’s Rules?
They don’t count as a no. I was incorrect about that point. They don’t count at all.
This list needs to be scrubbed for accuracy for sure. There was not just 1 vote.
What does that mean? What is inaccurate? I am more than happy to fix any inaccuracies in the post.
I was told there was more than 1 vote taken… this count should only articulate the vote that actually allowed the secret ballot. Like Rick Michael for example. Did the the people that abstained abstain on the vote that actually passed?
Yes, there were two votes, one to make the convention/primary vote a secret ballot and then the actual vote on the convention/primary. Only one person abstained in the real vote.
Yea so why are there 3 abstain and then the least has Rick Michael voting for a roll call.
This was the first vote, the vote to decide whether the real vote would be in secret or not. This vote had three abstentions. The real vote for a primary only had one person abstaining.
OK, it’s going to be a primary. Let’s close ranks.
Ok… Dave Brat beat Eric Cantor. Let’s close ranks. Why is Donald Williams and Eric Cantor and Ray Allen and Mike Thomas working to subvert Dave Brat?
They are? Can I help?
Every time we get rolled, the establishment tells us to “close ranks”. But then, they never accept defeat, and continue to oppose us even when we win. I am no longer confident that such folks winning benefits anyone.
That’s EXACTLY how I feel!