[EL] Big development regarding the "white knight" proposal at RNC Rule...

[jboppjr]

Yes. All true. I am referring to the current RNC Rules which are likely to be readoped as is, in my opinion, and what they mean. If they are changed, then we have a new ballgame of course.  Jim


Sent via the Samsung Galaxy Note® 4, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone

-------- Original message --------
From: Larry Levine <larrylevine at earthlink.net> 
Date: 4/22/2016  1:44 PM  (GMT-05:00) 
To: jboppjr at aol.com, law-election at uci.edu, Mark.Scarberry at pepperdine.edu 
Subject: RE: [EL] Big development regarding the "white knight" proposal at RNC Rule... 

<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
	{font-family:"Cambria Math";
	panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
	{font-family:Calibri;
	panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
	{margin:0in;
	margin-bottom:.0001pt;
	font-size:12.0pt;
	font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
	{mso-style-priority:99;
	color:blue;
	text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
	{mso-style-priority:99;
	color:purple;
	text-decoration:underline;}
p
	{mso-style-priority:99;
	mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
	margin-right:0in;
	mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
	margin-left:0in;
	font-size:12.0pt;
	font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
p.msonormal0, li.msonormal0, div.msonormal0
	{mso-style-name:msonormal;
	mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
	margin-right:0in;
	mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
	margin-left:0in;
	font-size:12.0pt;
	font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
span.EmailStyle21
	{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
	font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
	color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
	{mso-style-type:export-only;
	font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@page WordSection1
	{size:8.5in 11.0in;
	margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
	{page:WordSection1;}
-->Can’t the convention Rules Committee bring rules changes before the body. And can’t the body – the delegates – adopt new rules or rules changes before nominations and balloting begins? Is adoption of rules usually one of the earlier orders of business?Larry From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of jboppjr at aol.com
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 10:13 AM
To: law-election at uci.edu; Mark.Scarberry at pepperdine.edu
Subject: Re: [EL] Big development regarding the "white knight" proposal at RNC Rule... What you are talking about is under 40 (b) only and yes a candidate can qualify under 40 (b) to be eligible for nomination, the way you say, during voting. But 40 (b) is not the only rule applicable to this situation. 40 (e), which I quote below, deals with what happens when voting begins. Does 40 (e) permit reopening of the nominations once voing begins? The RNC General Counsel says no so that Rule 40 (e) would have to be suspended by a 2/3rds vote. I agree with this and make that argument below. You are thinking about 40 (d) where 40 (e) is the important rule regarding reopening the nominations. JimSent from AOL Mobile MailOn Friday, April 22, 2016 Scarberry, Mark <Mark.Scarberry at pepperdine.edu> wrote:I still don't see why a person who has the support of a majority of the delegates from eight states can't be nominated on a subsequent ballot if an hour or slightly more passes between ballots. Can't the chair declare an hour and a half recess for lunch or even for delegates to discuss matters among themselves between ballots? Yes, the rule says the chairman shall direct the roll of the states be called again after a vote that doesn't result in a winner. But it doesn't say that the chair must do so instantly. If a majority of delegates from eight states certify their support for a candidate at least an hour before the subsequent roll call vote, the rule seems to permit the candidate to be nominated.

Mark Mark S. ScarberryPepperdine University School of Law
Sent from my iPad On Apr 22, 2016, at 9:40 AM, Sean Parnell <sean at impactpolicymanagement.com> wrote:Agree it's pretty unlikely, but I can be a stickler for technical points on occasion. Sean

Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 22, 2016, at 12:17 PM, JBoppjr at aol.com wrote:If you don't follow the advice of your lawyer, what is the point of having one? It is inconceivable to me that the Chairman of our national convention will ignore or contradict the RNC General Counsel's interpretation of our own rules and that the convention will not adhear to that. JIm Bopp In a message dated 4/22/2016 11:37:33 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sean at impactpolicymanagement.com writes:Jim wrote: “Of course, RNC Rules takes precedent over whatever parliamentary authority the RNC uses and John Ryder, as RNC General Counsel, is the final authority on the interpretation of RNC Rules, so this seems to have settled the issue.” It was my understanding that John will technically advise the Chair, who then makes a ruling in the event of a dispute over the interpretation of the rules, but that such ruling is subject to an appeal to the entire convention. Is this correct? Best, Sean ParnellPresident, Impact Policy Management LLCAlexandria, Virginia571-289-1374sean at impactpolicymanagement.com   From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of JBoppjr at aol.com
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 7:55 AM
To: rhasen at law.uci.edu; law-election at uci.edu
Subject: Re: [EL] Big development regarding the "white knight" proposal at RNC Rules commit... Regarding your second point below, whether someone else can be nominated (without a suspension of the rules or a new rules change) after balloting begins at the RNC convention, there was a very important development which largely shuts that door.Yesterday, a possible Rules change was discussed at the RNC Rules Committee meeting that would have changed the parliamentary authority for the Rep. national convention from the House Rules to Roberts. One reason expressed by its supporters for this change was their concern that a new candidate could be put on the ballot during voting ,after several ballots resulted in no nominee, based simply on presiding officer's authority, as Mark argues below, rather than by a vote of the convention delegates. During the debate, RNC General Counsel John Ryder said that the "white knight" concern was not well founded because the RNC Rules themselves, specifically Rules 40(e), does not permit reopening of nominations, once voting has begun, without a suspension of the rules that requires 2/3 vote of the delegates. Click here: RNC rules panel rejects proposal to simplify convention procedures - Washington Times  Of course, RNC Rules takes precedent over whatever parliamentary authority the RNC uses and John Ryder, as RNC General Counsel, is the final authority on the interpretation of RNC Rules, so this seems to have settled the issue. This also has confirm my view, expressed below to Mark's original post, that RNC Rules prevent reopening of the nominations, once balloting had begun, unless the rules are suspended by a 2/3rd's vote.  Unfortunately, many in the media missed this important development about an issue that it has widely discussed.  Jim Bopp  In a message dated 4/3/2016 7:45:00 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, JBoppjr at aol.com writes:Regarding your two points discussed here: (1) Rove's statement:  Rule 40(b) only prevents a candidate who is not supported by a majority of delegates from 8 states from being formally nominated and from giving a nomination speech (together with seconding speeches), but doesn't prevent votes for the candidate from being cast and counted. Under current Rules, this statement is obviously wrong.  When the tally is announced after the vote of the delegates, only the votes for nominated candidates will be announced.  If someone votes for their favorite Fantasy Candidate, he or she will not be included in the tally announced by the convention chair at the conclusion of the vote.  This is provided for in Rule 40(d): "When at the close of a roll call any candidate for nomination for President of the United States or Vice President of the United States has received a majority of the votes entitled to be cast in the convention, the chairman of the convention shall announce the votes for each candidate whose name was presented in accordance with the provisions of paragraph (b) of this rule. Before the convention adjourns sine die, the chairman of the convention shall declare the candidate nominated by the Republican Party for President of the United States and Vice President of the United States." Paragraph (b) is the provision of the Rules on nomination of candidates.   Thus, only duly nominated candidates will be announced in the final tally and thus eligible to win the nomination. (2) whether someone else can be nominated (without a suspension of the rules or a new rules change) after balloting begins. No.  There are several reasons but the most obvious is that under 40(e),  "If no candidate shall have received such majority, the chairman of the convention shall direct the roll of the states be called again and shall repeat the calling of the roll until a candidate shall have received a majority of the votes entitled to be cast in the convention."  The Rules does not allow for new nominations between roll calls but only conducting the next roll call. Jim Bopp In a message dated 4/2/2016 6:01:25 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, Mark.Scarberry at pepperdine.edu writes:Thoughts on Rule 40(b), which some people are saying will prevent the GOP Convention from considering anyone but Trump (and maybe Cruz) for the presidential nomination? Karl Rove said on Hugh Hewitt's radio show that Rule 40(b) only prevents a candidate who is not supported by a majority of delegates from 8 states from being formally nominated and from giving a nomination speech (together with seconding speeches), but doesn't prevent votes for the candidate from being cast and counted. The second half of his statement (allowing for counting of votes) appears to be wrong per Rule  40(d), but perhaps only if a candidate (Trump in this case) receives a majority (1,237) of the votes entitled to be cast: (d) When at the close of a roll call any candidate for nomination for President of the United States or Vice President of the United States has received a majority of the votes entitled to be cast in the convention, the chairman of the convention shall announce the votes for each candidate whose name was presented in accordance with the provisions of paragraph (b) of this rule. Before the convention adjourns sine die, the chairman of the convention shall declare the candidate nominated by the Republican Party for President of the United States and Vice President of the United States.  I suppose what is apparently excluded is the announcement of votes for anyone other than those formally nominated, if there is a majority winner. It may be cutting it too thin to say that votes can be counted but just not announced; of course, if Trump gets 1,237, he gets the nomination, and it doesn’t matter whether votes for others are counted or announced. As I read the rule, the situation may change on a second or later ballot. Provided there is at least an hour between roll call votes, a majority of delegates from 8 states, many of which would be unbound, could certify that they support another candidate, making that candidate eligible to be nominated. Here is the text of Rule 40(b):(b) Each candidate for nomination for President of the United States and Vice President of the United States shall demonstrate the support of a majority of the delegates from each of eight (8) or more states, severally, prior to the presentation of the name of that candidate for nomination. Notwithstanding any other provisions of these rules or any rule of the House of Representatives, to demonstrate the support required of this paragraph a certificate evidencing the affirmative written support of the required number of permanently seated delegates from each of the eight (8) or more states shall have been submitted to the secretary of the convention not later than one (1) hour prior to the placing of the names of candidates for nomination pursuant to this rule and the established order of business. I think that is a fair reading of the rule, not a hyper-technical reading. Such a reading should not be treated as an underhanded attempt to avoid application of the rule and deny Trump the nomination. So Cruz or Kasich or even someone else could be eligible to be nominated on the second ballot or on a later ballot, even if they can’t be nominated on the first ballot. A rule could reasonably be adopted, or I suppose the chair could simply decide, that an hour or an hour and a half would elapse between ballots. (I don’t know of any rule that requires a roll-call ballot to begin to be taken immediately after the conclusion of an earlier ballot, but perhaps there is such a rule.)  There is a provision (Rule 40(a)) allowing for a motion for nomination by acclamation if only one candidate has been nominated, but I think any such motion could be contested and at least a voice vote be demanded if there is substantial dissent. There was a voice vote when Sen. Goldwater wa
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20160422/2a561b09/attachment.html>