Plans by County GOP on Early Endorsements Irks State Republicans

A countywide convention that some San Diego Republicans visualized as a means of strengthening the local party has divided GOP members here and generated threats of punitive action by state party officials upset over the prospect of pre-primary endorsements being made at the spring meeting.

Organizers of the convention, to be held April 30 at the Del Mar Fairgrounds, hope that the event will be headlined by the appearance of the Republican presidential candidates, followed by a straw vote of the 1,100 delegates expected to attend.

While that phase of the convention does not seriously trouble most local Republicans, some GOP activists are less sanguine about plans for the delegates to also consider making endorsements in state legislative and congressional contests--a proposal that could put the local party at loggerheads with state Republican leaders, who vehemently oppose the notion of pre-primary endorsements.

Endorsement Plan

Under a plan narrowly approved Monday night by the San Diego County Republican Central Committee, any state legislative or congressional contender who receives at least two-thirds of the votes of the convention delegates will become the local party’s endorsed candidate in the June primary.

Noting that local political parties in California traditionally have remained neutral in primaries, some San Diego Republicans warn that the plan--believed to be the first of its kind in the state--could engender intra-party animosities that may linger long after the primaries have ended.

“Our policy of no pre-primary endorsements has worked very well for a number of years for the Republican Party,” said San Diego County Republican Central Committee member Maxine Green. “This is a case of ‘if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.’ ”

But supporters of the convention argue that the meeting could unify, not divide, the local party and strengthen it by attracting hundreds of new precinct workers, for whom the convention represents an opportunity for more direct involvement in party affairs.

‘Same Objectives’

“Although we may differ on methods, we all have the same objectives,” said Steve Kane, the Central Committee representative of Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Coronado). “To those who say it could be divisive, well, anything in politics can be divisive. But I don’t think that’s going to happen. I don’t see anything but positive effects coming out of this.”

Statewide Republican leaders, however, were dismayed by Monday night’s action and, while trying to couch their sentiments in diplomatic, rather than threatening, terms, made it clear that the local party could face sanctions if pre-primary endorsements are made.

“We’re all on the same side, so you don’t really want to play the heavy or wave the big stick on this,” said Joe Irvin, a spokesman for the California Republican Party. “But the reality is that when you’ve got a county committee acting contrary to state policy, some kind of penalty is possible. Things like this have been talked about elsewhere, but right now, San Diego is the only area in question.”

The potential punitive action, Irvin explained, could include possible withdrawal of the local party’s charter or financial penalties for endorsement of candidates prior to a primary, though legislation would be needed to establish the latter penalty.

Mountain Out of Molehill

In response, convention proponents argue that the state party has no authority to revoke a local charter, because county central committees are elected in party primaries while the state body is appointed. For the same reason, they say that any financial penalties would be legally questionable and likely be perceived as heavy-handed.

“The state party’s really making a mountain out of a molehill,” said Alan Giesen, the local GOP’s parliamentarian. “They have to know that if they follow through on any of these threats, they’d look bad.”

Kane added: “About all the state party could do would be to tell us we’re bad boys. But I don’t think they’ll even do that, because that would be self-destructive. We want the same things they do. We just think that the people who doubt that the convention is the way to accomplish those goals are--on that point--wrong.”

Although some details remain to be worked out, tentative plans call for delegates to the April convention to be drawn from volunteers among the party’s rank-and-file. Each Central Committee member will be able to appoint five delegates, each state Assembly district committee will have 70 appointments--half of which are intended to go to nonpartisan officeholders within those districts--and hundreds of associate party members also will be invited.

To guard against attempts to pack the convention with partisans of a particular candidate, a credentials committee will screen delegates, and associate members must have joined the party at least two months prior to the meeting, Kane said.

“And anyone who wants to become an associate member at the February meeting is going to be looked at very carefully,” Kane added.

Generating Enthusiasm

The purpose of the convention, supporters argue, is to generate enthusiasm among local Republicans and draw more volunteers into the party’s fold.

“This will give the people who walk precincts and make the telephone calls more of a voice and, frankly, a chance to be part of something with a little glamour to it,” Kane said.

Unless the Republican presidential race has become a fait accompli by April, Kane said he expects all of the candidates remaining in the campaign to accept the invitation to address the local convention.

Although plans call for a presidential straw vote to be taken, the results will not be construed as an endorsement, Kane said. Rather, the percentage of the vote received by each candidate will simply be reported. The winner, however, clearly will try to capitalize on the outcome.

Organizers also hope that Republican incumbents and candidates for state legislative and congressional offices also will address the convention, with votes on possible endorsements to follow those speeches.

If a candidate receives the necessary two-thirds margin, “it’s difficult to see how endorsing under those circumstances could be seen as a divisive thing,” Kane said. “To get that kind of support, a candidate would have to stand head and shoulders above the others.”

Although most local Republican state officeholders have privately expressed opposition to the plan, Kane predicted that they have “nothing to fear from this, because I can hardly imagine any circumstances under which they wouldn’t get the endorsement.”

Some Republicans, however, warn that the situation could become thornier in races for offices not held by GOP incumbents. If multiple candidates seek the Republican nomination in those races, a pre-primary endorsement by the convention could produce ill will that could jeopardize party unity after the June primary.