Howard Phillips on the Nevada Issue

Howard Phillips has weighed in on the whole “Nevada disaffiliation issue” over on the Constitution Party’s website…

http://www.constitutionparty.com/news.php?aid=279

There was a national CP meeting last week and I was hearing a rumor that Michael Peroutka and some of his supporters walked out after the national committee voted not to expel the Nevada affiliate. No confirmation yet, but if anyone has any more info I’d like to hear it.

3 Responses to “Howard Phillips on the Nevada Issue”

  1. Austin Cassidy’s Third Party Watch » Blog Archive » Constitution Party in Serious Trouble? Says:

    [...] Earlier we mentioned Howard Phillips weighing in against the attempts to disaffiliate the Nevada affiliate of the Constitution Party… and the possibility that Michael Peroutka and others had decided to walk out of the party because of the national committee’s refusal to do so. [...]

  2. Joe Says:

    I joined the Constitution Party in 2000 after meeting Howard Phillips in the state capital and helping collect signatures to get him on the ballot. It was listening to you frequently on radio interviews explaining that anyone wh condones abortion in the cases of rape and incest is pro-abortion that attracted me to the Constitution Party. I am disappointed in his recent actions including his response and I have written to him expressing that disappointment.

    The Bylaws of the National Constitution Party provide NO GUIDELINES for disaffiliation; that is, the National Committee may, at its SOLE DISCRETION, disaffiliate by 2/3 vote of those registered and in attendance at any National Committee meeting ANY AFFILIATE for ANY REASON.
    The bylaws (relevant section quoted verbatim below) provide only a list of “PRELIMINARY QUALIFICATIONS for affiliation. There are NO QUALIFICATIONS for CONTINUED AFFILIATION and NO RESTRICTIONS on any member’s conscience regarding a vote on disaffiliation. The power to disaffiliate is granted WITHOUT EXCEPTION.

    I can respect those who voted differently from me, despite my strong disagreement with their vote. But it is inaccurate to claim that such a vote is “unconstitutional” (contrary to the our party’s bylaws). If it were, the chairman would have ruled the vote out of order. That didn’t happen.

  3. Chris Campbell Says:

    The vote in Tampa was by no means easy, I did not undertake my vote lightly. I did not agree w/Mr. Hansen’s views as a child is an “intruder” to be caught and killed. I did feel that there was, on the part of some-NOT ALL or MOST-pro-disaffiliators as strong anti-Mormon bias. I do not agree w/Mormon theology and hence-am not a Mormon. We should not have to argue theology in a political Party, yet too many bring it to the forefront. As a Catholic, I did have to ask myself “am I next to get the boot? If yes, then who?”

    I have deep respect for John Lofton, Micheal Peroutka and Pastor Baldwin. They have never treated me in any way disrespectful or as less in any measure, knowing my Faith. Lofton has called me a Christian more than once and I thank him for his willing to reach out.

    In the end, it came down to this-do we kick out a whole state Party over the views of 1 or 2? My answwer was “No”.

    It was not an easy vote at all, I prayed and thought about it long and hard. I listended to both sides. I had to make up my mind and did so. I ask that the other states-considering voluntary leaving, to not act harshly and to resconsider long and hard the implications of that action. It divided and destroyed the AIP in the early 70’s, it should not have to come to that with the CP.

Leave a Reply