Today in Maryland, the Republican Temporary Delegate Selection Committee put the finishing touches on its proposal for changes to the rules governing the party's 2012 presidential nomination. This isn't news in and of itself -- the RNC was set to vote on the final rules for the next cycle this summer anyway -- but the fact that the changes coincided with the recommendations of the Democratic Change Commission was.
Let's take a look at the revisions:
Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina were all given exemptions to hold their delegate selection events ahead of the party-designated window. [This is exactly what the Democrats have proposed. For them, though, it isn't a change from 2008. Recall that only Iowa and Nevada were able to avoid the RNC's sanctions for holding early contests in 2008. By virtue of holding contests that allocated delegates to the party's convention, all the other pre-February 5 states lost half of their delegates. New Hampshire and South Carolina would avoid that fate in 2012 under the TDSC's proposal.]
In a break from 2008, none of those four states could hold their primaries or caucuses prior to February. [Again, this is exactly what the Democratic Change Commission has recommended.]
All of the other states are able to hold their contests between March and June but no earlier. [This too, is in line with what the Democrats are proposing.]
In a twist, the TDSC is breaking from the Republican Party's tradition of leaving delegate allocation rules -- winner-take-all, loophole, proportional -- up to the states and is requiring that all states holding primaries or caucuses prior to April have proportional allocation rules in place for 2012. [This isn't what the DCC has called for in their recommendations because the Democrats abandoned winner-take-all rules based on Rule 11 from the Mikullski Commission prior to the 1976 election. However, it is an interesting move not only given the GOP's tradition of giving state's discretion on this issue, but because the Democrats were toying around with the idea of using winner-take-all rules as a means of rewarding states that opted to go later in the process.]
That's all fine and good, but what does all of this mean?
At the Republican National Committee's summer meeting in San Diego, the party took its first steps toward picking a site for the 2012 Republican National Convention. But the GOP has a strange rule that prohibits members of the site selection committee from representing states that will bid for the convention.
There are members of the committee from the states of Michigan, Ohio, Louisiana, Wisconsin, Colorado, Georgia, District of Columbia, Connecticut, Utah, Alaska and South Carolina. Which, in theory, would rule out the cities of Detroit (GOP 1980), Cleveland, Cincinnati, New Orleans, Milwaukee, Denver (Dem 2008 - how soon we forget), Atlanta (Dem 1988), Washington, DC, and other smaller cities.
It's hard to really believe that the RNC would rule out a really viable bid for this reason - much more likely that the site selection committee person would just resign - but for now, we have to assume these cities aren't eligible to bid for the convention. As the Atlanta Journal-Constitution notes:
We’re less than a year past the 2008 Republican National Convention in St. Paul., Minn., and already the list of 2012 sites has been narrowed.
And Atlanta is a victim of the narrowing. ... Not that our fair city had yet launched much of a campaign, or even said it was interested.
As for the Atlanta bid that never-will-be, state Insurance Commissioner John Oxendine, a 2010 candidate for governor, declared his intention to bring the 2012 convention to Atlanta during last year’s national convention.
As for cities still in the running, just two tidbits of news:
Meeting this week in San Diego, the RNC has a chance to scope out the self-described America's Finest City. California Republican Party Chairman Ron Nehring, who lives near San Diego, has already approached Mayor Jerry Sanders (R) about returning to San Diego for the 2012 convention, 16 years after ex-Sen. Bob Dole (R-Kan.) accepted the party's nomination here.
Florida has made a conscious effort to stay off the committee in hopes of returning the convention to the Sunshine State. Republicans and Democrats both held their conventions in Miami Beach in 1972, and the GOP held its 1968 convention there as well. -The Hill
San Diego is certainly a possibility, and Tampa made a serious go at the 2008 GOP convention. But, unfortunately, conventions take place in high hurricane season, and the political parties may be gun shy about choosing hurricane-prone cities. Last cycle, hurricanes certainly hurt Tampa's bid:
Tampa bid organizers said [Ken] Mehlman, [chairman of the Republican National Committee] told them the threat of hurricanes cost them the convention.
And this was before Hurricane Gustav hit Louisiana, causing a one day postponement of the start of the 2008 Republican convention in St. Paul. I wonder if New Orleans or Florida will ever see another convention.
Politico is reporting that Senator John Ensign's parents paid $96,000 to the family of his mistress.
The following is a letter from Ensign's lawyer:
In April 2008, Senator John Ensign’s parents each made gifts to Doug Hampton, Cindy Hampton, and two of their children in the form of a check totaling $96,000. Each gift was limited to $12,000. The payments were made as gifts, accepted as gifts and complied with tax rules governing gifts.
After the Senator told his parents about the affair, his parents decided to make the gifts out of concern for the well-being of long-time family friends during a difficult time. The gifts are consistent with a pattern of generosity by the Ensign family to the Hamptons and others.
None of the gifts came from campaign or official funds nor were they related to any campaign or official duties. Senator Ensign has complied with all applicable laws and Senate ethics rules.
