Some version of this pattern happens in every state. So I
thought it would be worth going over my suggestions for propositions to present
at a precinct meeting.
The starting place is the existing platform, which you can
probably find with an online search. The Texas GOP platform is not in bad shape
right now. There have been past precinct meetings where I had plenty of input I
wanted to see there. This time I’m fairly content with what’s there—with the
addition of some specifics that haven’t been handled.
My son Political Sphere thinks platforms should be very
short—principles only. Otherwise, holding candidates to agree is impossible and
undoable. There’s too much to keep track of. And he’s probably right. But,
dealing with the way things are, we can at least add our input to what’s going
to be there.
I do like the first page of the 2012 platform. There’s a
preamble and a list of principles. That single page probably does meet
Political Sphere’s suggestion:
PREAMBLE
We STILL hold these
truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are
endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are
Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. The embodiment of the conservative
dream in America is Texas. Throughout the world people dare to dream of freedom
and opportunity. The Republican Party of Texas unequivocally defends that
dream. We strive to preserve the freedom given to us by God, implemented by our
Founding Fathers, and embodied in the Constitution. We recognize that the
traditional family is the strength of our nation. It is our solemn duty to
protect life and develop responsible citizens. We understand that our economic success
depends upon free market principles. If we fail to maintain our sovereignty, we
risk losing the freedom to live these ideals.
PRINCIPLES
We, the 2012 Republican Part of Texas, believe in this
platform and expect our elected leaders to uphold these truths through
acknowledgement and action. We believe in:
1.
Strict adherence to the original intent of the
Declaration of Independence and the U.S. and Texas Constitutions.
2.
The sanctity of human life, created in the image
of God, which should be protected from fertilization to natural death.
3.
Preserving American and Texas Sovereignty and
Freedom.
4.
Limiting government power to those items
enumerated in the U.S. and Texas Constitutions.
5.
Personal Accountability and Responsibility.
6.
Self-sufficient families, founded on the
traditional marriage of a natural man and a natural woman.
7.
Having an educated population, with parents
having the freedom of choice for the education of their children.
8.
Americans having the right to be safe in their
homes, on their streets, and in their communities, and the unalienable right to
defend themselves.
9.
A free enterprise society unencumbered by
government interference or subsidies.
10. Honoring
all of those that serve and protect our freedom.
11. “The
laws of nature and nature’s God” as our Founding Fathers believed.
Then there are 21 more pages of specifics. Statements come
under these headings:
· PRESERVING AMERICAN FREEDOM—including 3 pages on
limiting government, plus more on the judiciary, election integrity, and
symbols of America’s heritage.
· STRENGTHENING FAMILIES, PROTECTING LIFE AND
PROMOTING HEALTH—including a lot on protecting marriage and life.
· EDUCATING OUR CHILDREN—emphasizing local control
and choice.
· PROMOTING INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM AND PERSONAL SAFETY—emphasizing
self-defense, religious liberties, and privacy issues.
· STRENTHENING THE ECONOMY—Before subheadings is a
restatement of the GOP platform of 1932, worth noting, because it still seems
timely today:
Whereas,
constructive plans for financial stabilization cannot be completely organized
until our national State and municipal governments not only balance their
budgets but curtail their current expenses as well to a level which ca be
steadily and economically maintained for some years to come.
We urge
prompt and drastic reduction of public expenditure and resistance to every
appropriation not demonstrably necessary to the performance of government,
national or local.
The Republican
Party established and will continue to uphold the gold standard and will oppose
any measure which will undermine the government’s credit or impair the
integrity of our national currency Relief by currency inflation is unsound in
principle and dishonest in results. The dollar is impregnable in the marts of
the world today and must remain so. An ailing body cannot be cured by quack
remedies. This is no time to experiment upon the body politic or financial.
· DEFENDING SOVEREIGNTY AT HOME AND ABROAD—emphasizing
Texas sovereignty, military strength, immigration, and foreign policy.
So, if you’re satisfied, great. If you see something that
needs change, offer a suggestion. There’s a formal way this is done in a
meeting—but don’t get too caught up in formalities. This is Texas, where the
Texas Declaration of Independence (celebrated yesterday, March 2nd) was
signed in an uncomfortable wood cabin, where nobody wanted to stay longer than
absolutely necessary. And Texans are still about getting it done, and worrying
about cleaning up the formalities later.
The formal way is to bring four copies: one for yourself, one for the precinct chair’s
files, one for the Resolution Committee for consideration at the district
meeting if passed, and one for the meeting secretary to include in the minutes. You use formal wording: “Whereas…, and Whereas…,
Therefore, it is proposed ….” The purpose is to give the reasons for the
suggested change to the existing platform, and then present the proposed
change.
But I’ve noticed a much more direct wording in the platform over the
last decade. And you can offer the proposition with just the plain words you
want the platform to say. In other words, direct is also acceptable. I’ve even
seen small, relatively informal precinct meetings where the group discusses an
issue and then someone writes out the suggestion on a piece of paper. And they
edit from there until there’s wording the group agrees either to accept or
reject. If accepted, by majority, it gets sent on to the district level platform
committee; the district offers it’s suggestions to the state platform
committee, and a final version gets voted on at the state convention.
I’ve had wording I’ve presented at my precinct end up in the
district version. That feels empowering to a grassroots sort of worker.
So, below are some of my suggestions. Feel free to copy and
use at your own precinct meeting, or be inspired to write your own. Do what you
feel confident you can defend in a meeting. And expect alterations, either in
your precinct meeting or at the next level up. In other words, don’t have to
worry too much about legal wording.
My concerns this year are mainly 10th Amendment
prevention of federal usurpation of authority.
Rejecting Obamacare
Whereas Texas rejects the federal government’s edict that free
Texas citizens buy specific healthcare products through the so-called
Affordable Care Act, and
Whereas Texans are forced to pay significantly higher federal taxes
for this rejected edict,
Therefore it is proposed that Texans be given an exemption from
paying the percentage of their federal taxes that would have gone to this
rejected requirement.
[Straightforward version: Texans should not be forced to
pay, whether through taxes or other requirements, anything toward Obamacare, which
is a program Texas rejects as beyond federal authority. So Texas will support Texas
citizens in non-payment of that portion of federal taxes, and will pursue state
solutions to protect Texans from federal coercion to pay.]
Rejecting Federal
Department of Education
Whereas Texans believe strongly in local control of education, and
Whereas the US Constitution does not authorize federal interference
in state and local education,
Therefore, it is proposed that Texas reject tax money going to a
federal department of education, and supports non-payment of that portion of
federal taxes that would go toward this rejected department.
[Straightforward version: Texas supports the dissolution of
the federal department of education, which has no basis in the US Constitution.
Therefore, Texas will support Texas citizens in non-payment of that portion of
federal taxes that would go to this rejected department, and Texas will pursue
state solutions to protect Texans from federal coercion to pay.]
Protecting Our Border
Whereas protecting international borders is a responsibility of the
federal government, and
Whereas the federal government has failed to use funding provided
by Congress for the purpose of protecting the Texas’s southern border, and
Whereas Texas will protect our international border, rather than allow
the dangers of failure to protect, and
Whereas the cost of performing the US responsibilities of border
protection are significant, and
Whereas getting costs reimbursed is difficult, inefficient, and
unfair to Texas,
Therefore it is proposed that the cost of protecting the border be
held in Texas, through withholding of that portion of federal tax payments, or
other state solutions.
[Straightforward version: Since the federal government has
failed to protect Texas’s international border, and Texas must protect its own
border, Texas can withhold payment for that portion of defense from being sent
to the federal government.]
Immigration Reform
Whereas the federal government has failed repeatedly to secure the
international southern border, and
Whereas the southern border is a risk for infiltration of such
evils as drug trafficking, human trafficking, terrorism, and violent crime, in
addition to the societal costs of non-violent illegal aliens, and
Whereas the federal government has failed to uphold current
immigration laws, and
Whereas the federal government has failed to improve and streamline
immigration processes,
Therefore it is proposed that no discussion of immigration reform
can be considered until after the federal government has proved good faith by
meeting its current obligations to secure the border and enforce existing
immigration laws.
[Straightforward version: The federal government has failed
to show good faith in discussions related to border security and immigration,
so until the border is secure and current laws are consistently enforced, Texas
is against any further discussions on immigration reform.]
Whereas Texas has the right to define terms used in legal contracts
recognized by the state, and
Whereas Texas has always had a specific definition for marriage
requiring the contract be considered permanent and exclusive between a man and
a woman, and
Whereas Texas has reinforced this longstanding definition through
legislation and Constitutional Amendment, and
Whereas any other definition of marriage is likely to harm families
and children, and also religious liberty,
Therefore Texas rejects the imposition of any other definition of
marriage by federal entities or other states, and considers any attempt to
impose any other definition a direct attack on Texas’s sovereignty, which will
be rejected.
[Straightforward version: Texas continues to assert its sovereign
right to define marriage as between one man and one woman, and rejects
imposition of any other definition by federal entities or other states.]
No comments:
Post a Comment