Kate helpfully dug up a MA statute requiring political parties to select a chairman within 10 days after presidential elections. Here it is:
The members of the state committee elected at the presidential primaries shall, within ten days after the thirtieth day next following their election, meet and organize for the purpose of choosing a secretary, treasurer, and such other officers, other than a chairman, as they may decide to elect; provided, however, that such members shall, within ten days after the November general election at which a president is elected, meet and choose a chairman.
The Dems, I’m pleased to say, unanimously reelected the excellent John Walsh on Thursday night — no surprise there. But who’s running the GOP ship, such as it is? Are they flouting state law in refusing to select a chairman within the statutorily-required time? What has happened to the party of law ‘n’ order? Also, what is the penalty for failing to comply with this statute? Perhaps at the next election they will only be allowed to contest 50% of the seats in the legislature, instead of their usual — oh wait! Anyway, inquiring minds want to know …
has always chosen it’s chairman in a January election after a presidential election. I believe it is in the bylaws.
So how do they get around M.G.L. c. 52, s. 1?
I am no republican, but this is really small time stuff. Do you really think that the “Halls of Justice” really care about who is in charge of this gang who can’t shoot straight?
<
p>I’d be inclined to think that there’s no penalty for violation here. After all, who would be able to have standing to challenge the Mass. GOP’s actions? I can’t imagine anyone in the state is harmed, helped, or otherwise affected in the least by anything the MA Repubs do these days.
it’s largely a joke. (Hey, rather like the MA GOP itself! KIDDING! KIDDING!) I mean, it does appear that the GOP State Committee is in violation of this statute. But the consequences of said violation strike me as virtually nonexistent, and I cannot imagine that there is either (a) a way to enforce it, or (b) a penalty for failure to comply.
You mean non-liberals didn’t see that this was a joke.
<
p>I thought liberals were the humor-impaired ones.
The only thing I cvan think of is if there is a similar provision as for there being no Democratic Town Committee. Secretary Galvin could declare the RSC to be defunct upon petition of a certain number of registered Republicans in the state to form a new state committee. I have no idea how close this is to reality – just a thought.
<
p>BTW, when I Googled “Massachusetts Republican Party charter” and clicked the I’m Feeling Lucky button, I was sent to the Wikipedia entry for the Massachusetts DEMOCRATIC Party! I think there’s a message there somewhere:)
Weird, it says “Each state committee shall consist of one man and one woman from each senatorial district”. Do they still do that?
<
p>Too bad, I’d been hoping that the GOP would be disqualified from Massachusetts for this. If all the Republicans became Democrats here, maybe the Progressives/Socialist wing would be forced out of the Democratic Party and go to the Green-Rainbow Party or Socialist Party.
> Too bad, I’d been hoping that the GOP would be disqualified
> from Massachusetts for this. If all the Republicans became
> Democrats here, maybe the Progressives/Socialist wing would
> be forced out of the Democratic Party and go to the
> Green-Rainbow Party or Socialist Party.
<
p>Hmm, not likely, but that would certainly make elections MUCH more interesting. It sure looks like the Republicans are fast approaching third party status. Would that really be so bad? I mean just think of it: who would you rather have as the second party in this state, Republican or Green-Rainbow?
Yes, it would be good to have a strong second party in this state. As stated many times here, the Republicans are going in the wrong direction. Meanwhile, despite my affection for several individual members of the GRP, the party as an entity is wholly incapable, and will be for the foreseeable future, of approaching anything near second party status.
<
p>The second party will form when enough Democratic legislative primaries are contested by members of various wings of the party. Someone will then realize it will be in their best interest to have the entire electorate participate in their election (in November), rather than a select few in September. While I would love to see that now, we are several elections cycles away from even the possibility of that happening.
“Teh Law” is for punishing others. Members of God’s Own Party are exempt and answer to a higher power, which only they, apparently, are able to channel.