Shortly after the 2006 primary election, the Republican Party of New Mexico’s central committee entered a closed-door meeting with J.R. Damron as its gubernatorial candidate and emerged with John Dendahl as its candidate. Damron’s withdrawal from the race, which allowed the party to place Dendahl on the ballot, was a surprise move that didn’t help the party at all: Dendahl was steamrolled by the Bill Richardson re-election train later that year.
But the switcheroo did earn the GOP some criticism. What happened in that private meeting? Was Damron pressured to drop out? Who orchestrated the change? Rank-and-file Republicans had no opportunity to vote in the primary for or against the man who represented their party at the top of the ticket that year — a controversial, fire-breathing politico many Republicans loved but others were embarrassed to call their own.
As a result, some ended up voting for Richardson, a westerner who, on issues including gun rights, was an acceptable choice in the eyes of many Republicans.
The state GOP should have learned a lesson about transparency following criticism from members of its own party and an embarrassing defeat that year. Apparently it has not.
The party’s 2008 quadrennial convention was held in
So I did, but when I arrived, I was told the chairman had changed his mind and closed most of the meeting to the public. I wouldn’t be allowed to enter the meeting room until after deliberation and voting were completed. Basically I’d be able to listen to speeches by the party’s federal candidates at the end of the meeting but, before that, would be barred from watching the selection of the party’s five presidential electoral nominees, its national committeeman and committeewoman and its delegates to the Republican National Convention, which will be held in
So I and several other journalists who were also told the meeting would be open stood around for nearly three hours before the meeting broke for lunch. In the meantime a supporter of former GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul was kicked out of the secret meeting while trying to ask why video cameras weren’t allowed.
During lunch I chatted with Republicans from around the state. Several asked why I wasn’t allowed in the meeting. Many expressed outrage over Weh’s decisions to keep the public and media out and to oust the Paul supporter from the meeting.
“We criticize the Democrats for secrecy, but we’re doing it too,” one politico told me.
“You should nail the chairman for this,” said one Republican elected official.
State GOP staffers didn’t have an answer when I asked why Weh changed his mind and closed the meeting.
Fund raising isn’t enough
Since I wasn’t in the meeting, I can’t comment on why the supporter of Paul was kicked out and whether his removal was justified, but I know this: The event should have been open, and he should have been allowed to record it. Weh has been praised by many Republicans for his ability to raise money, and that’s why a divided party decided to keep him in the top position last year despite criticism from county party officials about his lack of communication.
But the party should realize that fund raising isn’t everything. Even with Weh’s ability to raise money, the 2006 election resulted in no GOP gains in state government. This year the party will try again to make gains in the state Legislature, but the tide remains Democratic and many Republicans aren’t optimistic. The state’s minority party needs to make gains quickly in 2008 and 2010 if it wants influence in the coming redistricting process.
There’s also bad news on the federal front for the GOP. While three of five current members of Congress from
Apparently Weh’s ability to raise money isn’t enough for Republicans to gain ground in a left-leaning state. The Republican Party is disenfranchising many of its own members by shutting them out of important meetings. There’s nothing that requires the Republican Party to open its meetings, but if it truly wants to gain more influence in
Update, 2:50 p.m.
Photographer and blogger M.G. Bralley also has an extensive write-up on the closing of the meeting in