Evening Brief: Levy’s letter on proposed bylaws change

Dear Members of the State Central Committee,

Since the date of next meeting has been changed twice to March 14, 2023, unfortunately I will be unable to attend that night as I will be away on a long-planned (and paid for in advance) family trip next week. I do want to let you know my thoughts about one of the proposed bylaws amendments that I find problematic.

I would like to thank the members of the Bylaws committee. I know that this is intense and focused work. However, I oppose the proposed amendment to Article V Section 2 as it is written.

ARTICLE V

PRIMARIES AND SPECIAL ELECTIONS

Section 1. Eligibility to Vote in Republican Primaries

(a) Any elector enrolled as a member of the Republican party shall be eligible to vote in primaries for nomination of candidates for statewide office and candidates for office in the municipality, county or district, as the case may be, in which such elector resides and is enrolled.

(b) Eligibility to vote at any state, county, district or local Republican primary shall be governed solely by these state party rules.

Section 2. Party Funds Not To Be Spent in Primaries, Exceptions

During in a pre-convention contest or in a primary for statewide office,. the state committee shall not, without the prior approval of a vote of two-thirds of the total members of the state central membership at a duly noticed state central meeting, expend any funds of the state committee on behalf of an endorsed candidate for statewide office. This support may be withdrawn by a two-thirds vote of the total members of the state central membership.

—–[End bylaws language]————

While I respect the dedication and work of the Republican delegates at the Convention, they represent less than one percent of the registered Republicans in Connecticut. And I also respect candidates who work very hard to win the votes necessary at the Convention to win the Party’s endorsement or to qualify for the right to a primary.

It takes months of work by the candidate, volunteers, paid staff and it all costs a lot of money. There is also a legal process by which candidates can qualify for a primary by collecting signatures which also takes a lot of effort by many people and is very expensive to accomplish.

Candidates who qualify for a primary through either of these two options are legally entitled to a fair primary, not one in which 49 members of the the State Central Committee, the Chairman and perhaps a few other influential Republicans decide to put their collective fist on the scale in favor of one Republican candidate over any others.

This amendment concentrates power in the hands of a relative few as opposed to allowing Republican voters to have a real say in which candidate best represents our Party, our principles and our values, and can win in a General Election. It is antithetical to the Democratic process.

The State Party can only exist by virtue of generous contributions from Republicans donors who are our voters. The money donated to the State Party by our donors is donated for the purpose of defeating Democrat candidates, opposing and defeating Democrat policy initiatives (such as early voting and ranked choice voting), party building and party unity, not to defeat Republicans. Donors would not want their donations to support one Republican at the expense of another, especially if they happen to support an unendorsed candidate.

Please remember President Reagan’s 11th commandment: “Thou shalt not speak ill of another Republican!” This could result in donors by-passing the State Party during Primaries in favor of direct contributions to their preferred candidates, in other words fewer donations to the State Party. It also taints the State Party with the appearance of favored insider candidates on an unfair playing field.

It has been argued that this would simply allow the State Party to assist the endorsed candidates before they qualify for CEP to fend off attacks from Democrats. Well, not all statewide candidates can qualify for CEP. The US Senate Race is a statewide race and there is no CEP for federal candidates. This amendment could instantly dry up donations to the non-endorsed qualifier in a Primary for US Senate. If this race is not intended to be subject to the amendment, then the amendment is poorly written and should be re-written to specify “Statewide Constitutional Offices” and “…expend any funds of the State Party’s State Account…”

However, it still does not eliminate the problem of the State Party picking winners and losers without the input of the Republican voters who we then expect to volunteer, donate more money to the State Party and most importantly vote for those candidates. There is no provision for the money being used for positive support not to attack nor harm other Republican candidates. Frankly in contested races, positive support for one candidate is generally perceived as negative for the other candidate(s).

However, supposedly doing no harm to other Republican candidates while supporting one Republican’s campaign in a primary is still problematic. The Republican Voters should have the last word on the candidates who we expect them to support with time, treasure, energy and votes. And those candidates who respect the process, work and spend to qualify for the Primary either at the Convention or by collecting the required number of signatures deserve a fair playing field in that Primary. This amendment guarantees that it will not be a fair playing field.

It has also been said to me that I signed the RNC Rule 11 letter for George Logan in his 5th District Congressional Race as an argument in favor of this amendment. I signed the Rule 11 letter for George Logan because he was the only candidate in the race at the time I signed it. I did not sign the Rule 11 letter for the 4th District endorsed Candidate, Jamie Stevenson, because the other candidate, Michael Goldstein, put in the effort and spent the money to collect the signatures required to qualify for the Primary, no other reason. He was entitled to a fair Primary race. And the voters were entitled to have their say in who would be their candidate to represent them against Himes. We all want our strongest candidates to represent our party in the general election and I learned first hand how a Primary strengthens and seasons a candidate, makes for a stronger and better candidate in the general election.

The RNC Rule 11 is not for the purpose of insuring that the endorsed candidate wins a primary. It is used in cases such as Liz Cheney in Wyoming who had gone against the Republican caucus in Congress and participated in a partisan committee proceeding to go after a Republican President in an unfair, biased process with a predetermined outcome. Liz Cheney was overwhelmingly rejected by the Wyoming Convention and voters. The Rule 11 letter is also for races in which there is no Primary, such as George Logan in the 5th District. In discussing this with the RNC, it is not meant to influence the results in an otherwise fair and legal Primary race.

Defeating Democrats, Party Building, fostering Party Unity and supporting the ultimate Republican Candidates in the General Election against Democrats, especially after a contentious and expensive Primary are of paramount importance and the best use ot the State Party’s limited funds.

I would like to let you know that I have been honored to attend RTC Meetings and Lincoln Day dinners statewide to speak and to give an RNC Report over the last few weeks. I would be happy to attend any RTC meeting or dinner to give a report to any RTC in CT that would like me to do so. Please let your RTC Chairmen know and feel free to give them my contact information.

I have also been focused on the dreadful and mostly insane legislation proposed by the Democrats in the State Legislature and have sent testimony on multiple bills. I commend State Representative Joe Hoxha on his bill HB 6331, State Representative Doug Dubitsky on his bill: HB 6213, and State Senator Rob Sampson on his bills: SB 467, SB 544, SB 468. These are all important efforts to stand up for our Constitutional Rights, our children and for women. As Governor Sara H. Sanders said in her excellent response to the State of the Union, the Republican Party stands for “Normal, not crazy.”

I apologize for this long missive, but I did want to be in touch to weigh in on this matter since it seems to have become a matter of public discourse in our Party.

I am very sorry that I cannot attend in person on March 14th. I had intended to attend on February 27, in fact I even cut a family trip short to celebrate my parents’ 67th wedding anniversary in order to be back in time for February 27. However March 14 is impossible to change without canceling the entire prepaid trip at great expense. It is a bit of a personal triumph too. I am going back to ski at Vail, 8 years after my serious ski accident there, after 5 surgeries including one that saved me from being a quadriplegic, in the nick of time. God had other plans for me! I am going to conquer the mountain again!

Happy almost Spring! It is less than two weeks away now: March 20th! I look forward to seeing everyone in April!

Thank you to everyone for what you do for our country, our State and for the Republican Party!

Sincerely,

Leora

Leora R. Levy

Republican National Committeewoman – CT