From: "Linda Muller" <linda@buchanan.org>
To: brigade@zeus.wwol.com
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000
Subject: [BRIGADE] Old Guard in the News
Dear Brigade,
Pat Buchanan has always said that he would not change the Reform
Party platform. He said it in October 99. He has said it in numerous
interviews. Bay put out a statement. Why are these people lying about
what Pat actually says? And why are Donna Donovan, the National
Press Secretary, Jim Mangia, National Party Secretary, and Russ
Verney, National Committee (TX) spreading these lies?
They are using their positions in the Reform Party to mount a campaign
for Nader or Perot. These articles makes clear that they have violated
their pledge of neutrality. Where is the Executive Committee? Where is
Jerry Moan our Interim Chairman?
Also see comment below from Pat Owens - powens@execpc.com - who
is fighting against the Old Guard in Wisconsin where they refuse to let
us participate. This is typical of the few states who have leaders who are
loyal to Russ Verney. Thankfully, there are not many of them.
If you have the stomach for it (not only the content, but the volume as
well), I suggest you subscribe to the official Reform Party email list. Then
you can see first hand what we are up against. Here are the directions:
Send an email with the command 'subscribe' in the body to:
insidereform-subscribe@reform.com-us.net.
No subject is required and there should be no other text in the body.
PS -- Brigade, now you can see why I have been urging you to get
involved in your local Reform Party. Voting for 100% pro-PJB delegates
and officers is vital. And attending the Convention should be a priority for
all Brigades -- it's gonna be quite the Battle!
----------
Send reply to: insidereform@reform.com-us.net
From: Donna Donovan CopyQueen@aol.com
Date sent: Tue, 30 May 2000 22:37:51 EDT
Subject: InsideReform - Re: No Subject
Date Posted: 05/30/2000
Pat Buchanan spurs further division in Reform Party
by Kelley O. Beaucar, ConservativeHQ.com
These days, members of the Reform Party are so disenchanted with
prospective presidential nominee Pat Buchanan that they are turning to
consumer advocate Ralph Nader for a potential coup d'état.
That's right. Buchanan, who has rankled the feathers of more than a few
Reform Party purists by stacking state delegations with his supporters
and threatening to change the party's platform to better resemble his
social conservatism, is losing popularity in the very party that took him in
when the GOP disregarded him.
As a result, there is a movement by top leaders in the party to try and
persuade Nader to run against Buchanan for the nomination at the August
convention in Long Beach, California. If that doesn't work, they are hoping
that a cross-endorsement by the Reform Party and the Green Party -- for
which Nader is the likely nominee -- will do the trick.
In recent nationwide and state polls, Nader is showing incredible
success for a third party run and has even polled as much as 9 percent
in California. Buchanan, however, has been showing decreasing numbers
since he starting aggressively campaigning on the far right again.
"I think it would be an incredible situation," says Jim Mangia, the
national Reform Party secretary who has personally talked to Nader and
his campaign people in hopes of shifting the party away from Buchanan's
"old divisive politics" and toward "the strength of the Reform Party before
Buchanan came in."
So where exactly did it all go wrong? According to party leaders, most
were willing to accept Buchanan as the nominee apparent several
months ago when he announced his desire to run. Then, according to
Mangia and others, Buchanan began showing signs of another agenda.
He started stacking delegates in the state parties, encouraging party
splits within the state organizations that will have to be worked out
before the convention and has been unclear about his intentions for
changing the party platform once he is nominated.
A platform, party members insist, that is supposed to be free of hot
button social issues like abortion and immigration. Buchanan is
notoriously pro-life and has said publicly that if elected, he would make
sure any Supreme Court nominees would be of the same mind. Some
party members are concerned Buchanan will use his supporters within
the state delegations to force the issue at the convention.
"There's been kind of a mixed bag of issues that has caused people to
look elsewhere," says Donna Donovan, a national party spokesperson.
She explained that when Texas billionaire Ross Perot started the Reform
Party in 1992, it was done so with the mission of government reform and
making politicians fiscally accountable. That platform must remain the
same, despite individual candidates' pet issues, she and others say.
"The Reform Party doesn't address social issues," she said. "The
ultra-right conservative Republicans have been pulling their party in that
direction for a long time," she continued, as the ultra-liberals have been
pulling the Democrats in their own direction. "We have this great highway
down the middle and that's where most of us are," she said. No one likes
the idea of Buchanan coming in and changing that.
Buchanan, mostly through campaign manager and sister Bay Buchanan,
said he would not push for a change in the platform's planks to represent
his views; rather, he would ask to write a non-binding "preamble" as the
party's nominee. Then, in a New York Times article Friday, Bay
Buchanan suggested it would be no big deal if the candidacy took on a
"conservative tint" in 2000.
Repeated calls to the Buchanan campaign were not returned for
comment on this story.
Meanwhile, as Mangia and Donovan hope a nomination or cross-
endorsement of Nader will prove a viable option for disgruntled party
members (only 36 states allow a candidate to be endorsed by more than
one party, however), other movements are afoot.
According to Russ Verney, an original member and close confidant of
Perot's, there are two more factions that have emerged since the party
embarked on this shaky and uncertain campaign trail. One is a group of
Perot loyalists who hope to bring him out of seclusion and back on the
stump and another wants to sit the election out altogether and mend the
party's wounds for the fight in 2004.
Perot -- like Nader -- would have difficulty getting on the ballot in the
states that don't automatically recognize the Reform Party at this point in
the game (though Nader already has Independent ballot access in at
least 20
states).
"You can't start in the 11th hour," observed Verney.
However, he said someone like Perot could use the $12.5 million in
federal matching funds that he won for the party in 1996 to spread the
message of government reform and to engage in "party building."
But even that seems unlikely now, as Perot has not given a public
interview in years and may not even attend his own party's convention
due to his apparent dislike of Buchanan.
The party's nomination process allows the entire membership to cast a
mail-in ballot before the convention. Once tallied, the winner will be
announced at the convention, with a two-thirds vote by the delegates the
only measure to overturn the nomination.
So, in the meantime, party members like Mangia and Donovan and those
spearheading the resurrection of Perot hope they can give the rest of the
membership an option when they are casting their ballots in late July.
Nader's people did not return phone calls to confirm how serious the
discussions were at this time.
"I think it would be a pretty dynamic concept," that would grab the
attention of the two dominant major parties, Donovan said.
---------
Date sent: Wed, 31 May 2000 09:43:49 -0700
From: Patricia Owens - powens@execpc.com
To: insidereform@reform.com-us.net
Subject: Re: InsideReform - Buchanan Weakening
Reform Party?
In Wisconsin, the selection of delegates wasn't the problem then as this
news article states. The Reform Party changed their by-laws on Feb.
25 so that any new member could not vote on anything in the party for 6
months. They would not let any old members or new members ask any
questions which was to done under Roberts Rules of Orders.
The State Chair Margo Hanson was sent a request by me to ask to
speak for a few minutes at the convention. This was done two weeks
before the meeting. They would not answer that request for time,
completely ignored any other questions, posed to them, only
acknowledged that they ran their meetings by Roberts Rules of Order.
No one was allowed to ask any question ... a sad meeting.
Pat
CopyQueen@aol.com wrote:
Buchanan battle weakening third party Several chairmen of state
branches
might disaffiliate
By Tom Squitieri
USA TODAY....
