19 votes

Romney Nomination by Acclamation?

I would like to hear everyone's take on the possibility that Romney delegates suspend the rules at the RNC and nominate him by Acclamation.

Here is where I read it: http://www.thegreenpapers.com/PCom/?20120429-0

-------------------------------

UPDATE:

It appears the issue has been resolved!

As cevans93 says below,

"A candidate can only win by acclamation if no other candidate vying for the nomination has a plurality of the delegation from 5 states. We'll have that. In most years, only the presumptive nominee has the delegates he needs. So Romney cannot win by acclamation as long as everything goes smoothly in our key states."

Here is the relevant rule:
-----------
RULE NO. 40
Nominations
(a) In making the nominations for President of the United States and Vice President of the United States and voting thereon, the roll of the states shall be called separately in each case; provided, however, that if there is only one candidate for nomination for Vice President of the United States who has demonstrated the support required by paragraph (b) of this rule, a motion to nominate for such office by acclamation shall be in order and no calling of the roll with respect to such office shall be required.

(b) Each candidate for nomination for President of the United States and Vice President of the United States shall demonstrate the support of a plurality of the delegates from each of five (5) or more states, severally, prior to the presentation of the name of that candidate for nomination.
-----------

And in order to get around that rule, a suspension of the rules would be needed. Since the default rules adopted by the national convention are the US House of Representatives rules, that would required a vote of 2/3 of the delegates which is very remote to say the least!

Here are the relevant rules:
------------
RULE NO. 30
Rules of Order
The Rules of the House of Representatives of the United States shall be the rules of the convention, except that the current authorized edition of Robert’s Rules of Order: Newly Revised (“Robert’s Rules of Order”), shall be the rules for committees and subcommittees of the convention, insofar as they are applicable and not inconsistent with the rules herein set forth; provided, however, that the convention may adopt its own rules concerning the reading of committee reports and resolutions.
------------
RULE XV
BUSINESS IN ORDER ON SPECIAL DAYS
Suspensions
1. (a) A rule may not be suspended ex-cept by a vote of two-thirds of the Members voting, a quorum being present. The Speaker may not entertain a motion that the House suspend the rules except on Mondays, Tuesdays, and Wednesdays and during the last six days of a session of Congress.
(b) Pending a motion that the House suspend the rules, the Speaker may en-
tertain one motion that the House adjourn but may not entertain any other
motion until the vote is taken on the suspension.
(c) A motion that the House suspend the rules is debatable for 40 minutes,
one-half in favor of the motion and one-half in opposition thereto.
------------

Here is a link to the full national convention rules for the year 2008: http://www.gop.com/images/legal/2008_RULES_Adopted.pdf

Here is a link to the US House rules: http://clerk.house.gov/legislative/house-rules.pdf

The only caveat is that the RNC rules above are from 2008. Be sure to read this excellent comment by samadamscw: http://www.dailypaul.com/229900/romney-nomination-by-acclama...

thanks samadamscw and cevans93!

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Jeez...

Just vote Ron Paul and don't abstain. If delegates outright vote for Ron Paul from the start, that's their constitutional right, and then romnidiots can motion for a suspension of every single NRP rule to no avail, because no motion can suspend the constitution and freedom of speech. Quit sweating this bologna. Not Robert's Rules nor National Republican Party Rules supersede the First Amendment. Remember what we're standing for; it's our most powerful tool. The RNC can make any rule it wants with minimal judicial intervention due to protection by the First Amendment, but the line is drawn when they infringe on the rights of individual members. Once votes for Ron Paul are made, they can't be nullified.

While the Convention is

While the Convention is governend by the Rules of The House Of Representatives, it is also governed by the GOP Rules, which may change or modify the House Rules for the Convention; and as such I give you: 2008 Rules Adopted

RULE NO. 32

Suspension of Rules
A motion to suspend the rules shall always be
in order, but only when made by authority of a majority
of the delegates from any state and seconded by a
majority of the delegates from each of five (5) or more
other states severally.

How it is that you looked at RULE NO 30 and RULE NO 40, but skipped over RULE NO 32 is beyond me.

So technically, Yes; they can suspend the Rules and nominate Mitt via Acclamation, because after a suspension of the Rules I'm pretty sure the vote to acclamation only needs a simple majority to pass.

However suspension of the Rules could backfire if a RP delegation nominates RP via acclamation first and has other delegations ready to second the motion; then RP could become the GOP Nominee.

Usually the way a suspension works is you do it for a specific

rule with a specific alternate rule as part of the motion.

For example, you would not just make a motion to "Suspend the Rules" and then all rules are in stasis until un-suspended if your motion passes.

What you would do is make a motion to "Suspend the Rules and nominate a candidate by acclamation." Thus, the only rules suspended are those which outline a procedure contrary to nominating by acclamation, and then only until that even takes place, or a motion is made to re-instate the rules if the acclamation fails for some reason. (or some other motion intervenes to change things up)

I see the rule and thank you

I see the rule and thank you for your point.

What I can say is, if that is the case (6 states can suspend the rules), the entire convention seems a little fragile don't you agree?

And then what? Would new rules have to be voted on?

And why do you think a simple majority would be enough for a nomination by acclamation? There would be no rules for nominations =p

This whole prospect seems very illogical to me unless the people suspending the rules have the votes to re-create rules in their favor.

Six states cannot suspend the rules. It takes six states to

make and second the motion. Then the motion to Suspend gets debated, then voted on, and per House rules, requires a 2/3 to accomplish.

Note the language in rule 32. Compare it to the House Rule on Suspensions.

The House rule says such a motion is only in order on certain days of the week.

Rule 32 says it is ALWAYS in order, as long as it is made by the majority of delegates from one state, and the majority of delegates from five other states (combined, not individually) give their second to it. Thus, rule 32 was necessary to deal with the nuance of the House Rules which would otherwise not be useful or even possibly make sense, depending on the days of the week that the RNC Convention is held.

great! thanks!

great! thanks!

You may want o re-read Rule

You may want o re-read Rule 40 again, because it clearly doesn't' say what you THINK it says. IT talks about calling for nomination of the President and VP by affirmation SEPARATELY. And the second part of 40a is about VP only. It is talking about situations where there is an obvious nominee who has already chosen his VP and it is accept that the party will agree to that choice. It has NOTHING to do with calling for a vote for affirmation for the presidential nominee,

Doh! I guess that i why sandwich delivery boys shouldn't be interpreting rules like this.

If Romney wins TX big..

it's going to be June 2nd by then, around the time that Romney would in fact get a mathematical lock on the Nomination.

But "Acclamation" aside, Ron Paul still gets microphone time.

I would hope they don't pull a typical act and cut his mic or the distortion or something.

Your first mistake is

Your first mistake is thinking that ANYONE on this site is an expert o the3 rules. NO ONE here knows what the fuck they are talking about in ANYTHING except maybe the best way to deliver sandwiches in their minimum wage job.

Again...RON PAUL said it is not going to happen! And said in 2008 that he doesn't want it even attempted

I guess he is a troll! That FUCKING piece of shit Ron Paul! Trolling us all!

I know this...if Ron Paul is not nominated, I am killing myself! Who is with me! Come on...I know a lot of you will...speak up now!

First

They laugh at you,
Then they hate you,
Then you win,

"Rommney Trolls" "In what world could you hope to beat us? Such a place doesn't exist"
"The Revolution" "Welcome to the new world"

The first of my ancestors arrived in 1687, Indentured to serve another for 4 years, we fought in the Revolutionary war, Civil war, WW1, WW2, Korea, Vietnam, and Served during Desert Shield/Storm, Now my Family and I serve The "Revolution"

"I am killing myself!"

Okay, Private Pile.. Let me know if you need any help. :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUc62jD-G0o

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

I won't stop you.

.

sharkhearted's picture

Romney nomination...

...by OVER-EXAGERRATION.

~Chris
Norfolk, VA

~Chris
Norfolk, VA

Time to INVESTIGATE the investigators of 9/11. PROSECUTE the prosecutors. EXPOSE the cover-up.

sharkhearted's picture

Romney nomination...

...by ABERRATION.

~Chris
Norfolk, VA

~Chris
Norfolk, VA

Time to INVESTIGATE the investigators of 9/11. PROSECUTE the prosecutors. EXPOSE the cover-up.

sharkhearted's picture

Romney nomination...

...by SPECULATION.

~Chris
Norfolk, VA

~Chris
Norfolk, VA

Time to INVESTIGATE the investigators of 9/11. PROSECUTE the prosecutors. EXPOSE the cover-up.

Its like date rape

The GOP pretends to not hear the majority of americans saying no no NO NO to Rummy. They wanted him is what they say as they forced themselves upon us.

sovereign

"Game On Guaranteed--GOP Quits"

Great, then there is absolutely nothing they can do to stop the RP delegation. They can't suspend the rules--ever and go by a voice vote. That's great!!

Uh, oh, wait a minute. You mean the GOP and the rich are going to lose trillions of dollars because a rule stopped them--wow. That's all it takes. Brilliant!!

So, that means they'll simply have to do things legally, such as promise power to RP delegates, use the MSM, etc.

What else might they do?

Why can't they just show up, suspend the rules and nominate Romney. They've done this in most caucus states and it went unreported. If things go brokered, they'll just adopt new rules it would seem.

# 1 : Only a 2/3 majority can

# 1 : Only a 2/3 majority can suspend rules of order, this is no way suspends the RNC call ie bylaws themselves. If Romney doesn't even have half no way will he get 2/3

# 2 : A candidate can only win by acclamation if no other candidate vying for the nomination has a plurality of the delegation from 5 states.

We have 5 states already I believe and many more to come.

The green papers has always been a piece of $hit propaganda website.

Which five states do we have?

Which five states do we have? I believe that we have Louisiana, Minnesota, Iowa, and probably will get Maine. Which other ones am I missing?

2/3?

does the 2/3 number come from the rules of the house of representatives?

Not sure what the House of Representatives has to do with this..

The 2/3 requirement is from Robert's Rules of Order. It is the body of parliamentary rules which nearly every deliberative body adopts. Some will pass additional rules that handle specific situations not included in Robert's (because Robert's is general for all assemblies. A particular assembly may have responsibilities or duties or issues to deal with that others do not, thus they need special rules for those special situations)

Even those special rules are usually crafted with Robert's as a guide and anything not spelled out in special rules are handled by Robert's.

Now, the House has power to set it's own rules. It has done so. I'm not sure if they follow Robert's at all, or only their special version of it.

Robert's Rules of Order is

Robert's Rules of Order is not applicable at the National Convention. House of Representatives' rules apply, or so I read in another thread on this topic yesterday. Can anyone clarify this?

yes that is correct and that

yes that is correct and that is the reason I asked about the house rules.

you can confirm this info by looking at the GOP rules

Sorry, it's still 2/3 anyway.

Here's the particulars

RULE NO. 30
Rules of Order
The Rules of the House of Representatives of
the United States shall be the rules of the convention,
except that the current authorized edition of Robert’s
Rules of Order: Newly Revised (“Robert’s Rules of
Order”), shall be the rules for committees and
subcommittees of the convention, insofar as they are
applicable and not inconsistent with the rules herein set
forth; provided, however, that the convention may
adopt its own rules concerning the reading of
committee reports and resolutions.

http://www.gop.com/images/legal/2008_RULES_Adopted.pdf

Now however, it is important to note that this ONLY applied to 2008.

See the Preamble:

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the
following be and hereby are adopted as The Rules of
the Republican Party, composed of the rules for the
election and government of the Republican National
Committee until the next national convention, the
rules under which delegates and alternate delegates
shall be allotted to the respective states in the next
national convention, and the rules under which such
delegates and alternate delegates shall be elected and
under which contests shall be considered, and the rules
of business of this national convention. {emphasis mine}

So, these rules were only in effect with respect to conventions for the 2008 Convention. (they were adopted on the 1st day - September 1st, 2008)

Presumably, different rules can be adopted for the 2012 convention.

Here is the rule on "Suspending the Rules:"

RULE NO. 32
Suspension of Rules
A motion to suspend the rules shall always be
in order, but only when made by authority of a majority
of the delegates from any state and seconded by a
majority of the delegates from each of five (5) or more
other states severally.

VERY interesting. Certainly, this number could fluctuate depending on which state delegations are making the motion and offering their second.

So this rule overrides the House of Representatives Rule at least with respect to how a motion to Suspend the Rules can be entertained.

But again, this must be adopted on the first day of the Convention and could be changed.

Note though, this is only a rule for legitimacy of a motion to Suspend.

The actual vote required to suspend is not listed in the Republican Rules, and thus we must look to the House of Representatives Rules for that answer:

RULE XV
BUSINESS IN ORDER ON SPECIAL DAYS
Suspensions
1. (a) A rule may not be suspended ex-
cept by a vote of two-thirds of the
Members voting, a quorum being
present. The Speaker may not enter-
tain a motion that the House suspend
the rules except on Mondays, Tuesdays,
and Wednesdays and during the last six
days of a session of Congress.
(b) Pending a motion that the House
suspend the rules, the Speaker may en-
tertain one motion that the House ad-
journ but may not entertain any other
motion until the vote is taken on the
suspension.
(c) A motion that the House suspend
the rules is debatable for 40 minutes,
one-half in favor of the motion and
one-half in opposition thereto. {again, emphasis mine}

http://clerk.house.gov/legislative/house-rules.pdf

Thus, a 2/3 vote IS required to actually suspend the rules, AND it's a lot harder to even get the motion considered compared to Robert's or even the House Rules.

I did not only apply to '08;

I did not only apply to '08; those rules were made in '08 for this convention. Also, RULE NO. 15(b) was adopted in 2010, so it couldn't have been used in 2008. The 2008 Rules Adopted are the Rules which govern the Convention of 2012; as the Rules established in 2012 will be the Rules which govern the Convention in 2016.

Please read the rules again. Specifically the parts I quoted.

Most notably, the preamble.

It is quite clear that these rules do NOT apply to a future convention (in 2008) but rather to THIS convention. (the one in 2008 in which they were adopted)

Those rules were adopted at the opening of the 2008 Convention. Thus it is crystal clear that the rules that deal with the convention are for the 2008 event.

There are also rules contained therein for the RNC, and delegate selection procedures PRIOR to the 2012 convention.

While a convention can adopt rules, the RNC can amend them. They did this with Rule 15(b) which has nothing to do with the rules of business of the convention in 2012, but rather the selection process for delegates which takes place PRIOR to the opening of the convention.

Mark my words, on the opening of the 2012 Convention, one of the first items of business will be to adopt a new set of rules that will govern the 2012 convention itself, and then the RNC and the party in general from then until the 2016 convention - but NOT the 2016 convention itself.

The rules adopted at the opening of the convention are for the party as a whole and comprise three main parts - the RNC, the party business between conventions, and the PRESENT convention. (the one in which they are adopted) These rules continue in effect UNTIL the adoption of new rules AT THE BEGINNING of the next convention. (now 2012)

This is in keeping with general procedure for parliamentary bodies. The assembly votes on its own rules. It is not bound by rules passed by a prior assembly. (it can choose to re-adopt those rules, but it does not have to)

Each Convention is a different assembly because the delegates are always different.

If I'm not mistaken, the House adopts its rules at the beginning of each Congress. (every two years) Certainly, they may carry forward many from the previous Congress, but they don't have to, and technically, I'd guess unless they re-adopted them, there likely would be NO rules. Though that is debatable.

thanks for the research!

thanks for the research!

The 2/3 to suspend the rules

The 2/3 to suspend the rules is from any body in america pertaining to parliamentarian procedures in public or private meetings unless otherwise stated in that private parties bylaws.

It would take a 2/3 vote to suspend the rules. It is possible,

but not likely.

The only other way it could be done with a simple majority, is if the rule is changed before it is officially adopted by the convention early on.

But that's only if the RNC allows that. Presumably, standing rules are always in effect and don't have to be specifically adopted every convention.

So while Rule 40 precludes acclamation nominations, that rule CAN be suspended. If Paul has enough delegates to have a shot to win, then that means Romney won't have 2/3 majority to make such a move. It would also be a huge embarrassment to make such a motion and have it fail pathetically. You don't make such a motion unless you know you have the votes to pass it first. It smacks of major arrogance otherwise.

I don't think that would need

I don't think that would need to be a concern, If they could vote that through with a majority, that would mean they have the majority of delegates anyway