Montana Constitution Party Bolts

Word is that the Constitution Party of Montana has disaffiliated with the national CP. They seem to be following the lead of other affiliates in New York, Ohio, and I believe Oregon that have all done the same thing.

This must be particularly stinging as the Montana party is in good shape to capture a seat in the state legislature this year with Rick Jore’s campaign.

38 Responses to “Montana Constitution Party Bolts”

  1. Jason Says:

    boy o boy..this is becoming a nightmare..

  2. Citizens For A Better Veterans Home Says:

    As we’ve mentioned before, the ‘Reform Movement Disease” (splinters of splinters…) and similar splits vis a vis veteransparty.us verses veteransparty.com….....

  3. Jason Says:

    I’m assuming it is just a matter of time before they throw in the towel. I don’t see how they can continue to be operational and still appeal to people when the party itself is dissolving.

    What is even more aggravating (and this is partly out of ignorance because it is not possible for me to hear about everything that goes on) is that the NHQ insist on remaining silient as state party after state party leaves. No offical releases, no addressing the issues and no mail letters: nothing. I don’t get it.

    What now?

  4. Jason Says:

    Austin,

    Where did you get this information from? Did an official contact of the Montana CP release this?

    Anymore you can tell us?

  5. Citizens For A Better Veterans Home Says:

    www.constitutionparty.org/index

    In Montana twenty-two Constitution Party candidates filed to run for the State Legislature. Rick Jore, running in House District 12, is a former Republican legislator and has a good shot at winning the seat.

    The Constitution Party of Utah is running a full slate of exciting candidates for this fall’s elections, including strong candidates for the Senate seat held by Senator Orrin Hatch and for all three congressional districts!

    per Wednesday 12 July 2006, Doctor Paul Wayne Snyder, PhD

  6. Donald Raymond Lake Says:

    Montana Area Code ______

    District Candidate E-mail
    SD 11 Jonathan Martin 5Martins@In-Tch.Com
    More information about Jonathan

    District Candidate E-mail
    HD 1
    Russell Brown RussellBrown@LCLink.Com

    District Candidate Phone
    HD 2
    Freeman Johnson 295-7302

    District Candidate Phone
    HD 3 Tad Rosenberry 892-3845

    District Candidate E-mail
    HD 6 Rick Komenda FCCP@CenturyTel.Net

    District Candidate E-mail Web Site
    HD 12
    Rick Jore RickJore@HotMail.Com rickjore.com
    More information about Rick

    District Candidate Phone
    HD 18
    Tim Sollid 866-3570

    District Candidate Phone
    HD 20 Terry Poupa 452-6610

    District Candidate E-mail
    HD 21
    Kent Holtz KNH3@SoFast.Net

    District Candidate Phone
    HD 22
    Roger Nelson 771-7505

    District Candidate E-mail
    HD 23 Christopher Gregory KidWilderness@HotMail.Com

    District Candidate E-mail
    HD 24 Philip DuPaul DogHouse@SoFast.Net

    District Candidate Phone
    HD 25 Robert O’Connor 452-4285

    District Candidate Phone
    HD 35 Torry MacLean 724-3330

    District Candidate E-mail
    HD 43 David Anderson DAnde1706@MSN.Com
    More information about David

    District Candidate E-mail
    HD 59 Jay McKean McKean@TGRSolution.Net

    District Candidate Phone
    HD 87 George Karpati 363-1151

    District Candidate E-mail
    HD 89 Gil Turner GilTurner@ISP.Com

    District Candidate E-mail
    HD 96
    Kandi Matthew-Jenkins Kandi@MtCraftConnection.Com

  7. Richard Winger Says:

    Except in a presidential election year, the consequences of a state unit of a national party “disaffiliating” are almost nil. It will be much more serious for the Constitution Party if these state units are still “disaffiliated” in 2008. Because, in a presidential year, state units disaffiliating would probably lead to rival presidential tickets all using the “Constitution Party” label, a real mess, similar to the Libertarian Arizona mess in 2000.

  8. Chris Campbell Says:

    I am curious about those affiliates that have left the National Party- if staying in the CP is soo evil, bad and distasteful, will these state parties shed the name or keep it for ballot access?? IF so, kind of 2-faced, no??

    “we don’t like you and want nothing more to do with you, but by golly, we are going to keep this name!!”

  9. Michael Says:

    Add Michigan and perhaps Idaho and Maryland to those leaving or might be leaving. It is getting more and more like the American Party/ American Independent Party split in the 1970’s.

  10. Gary Odom Says:

    I agree with what Chris Campbell said.

    Michael, what a shocker to see you on this thread trumpeting percieved problems for the Constitution Party! Michael who? (And I am not suggesting you are a Michael of any significance in or out of the CP). I know why the AIP split from the American Party. I was there. I have first hand knowledge. If anything, it is the complete reverse of what happened in 1972 and 1973. More important, the Constitution Party is much stronger than either of those entities were at that time and will survive this and probably actually benifit from it.

    Should the Constitution Party apologize because we believe women should have the right to vote, participate in party affairs and hold public office; that there is NOTHING wrong with a political party because it welcomes and includes Mormons, Jews and Catholics (and every racial, ethnic and religious group) and because, although we have extremely strong pro-life convictions, we don’t boot out individuals or state parties because they express a view that is not in lock-step compliance (by the way, compliance is one of their favorite terms-also a favorite of the IRS, United Nations and the National Socialist German Workers Party) with every plank in our platform?

    Many who might be considering leaving have been lead to believe that the Constiution Party has suddenly become a pro-abortion party. Those who leave who are of good will and who have some reasonable degree of common sense will be back when they see they have been mislead. I don’t really believe we will miss those who have caused them to be mislead.

    Let me say this: I hope Mary Starrett does really well in Oregon and that Rick Jore wins in Montana. There’s a long way to 2008. We who support the Constitution Party, and the direction of its national committee, have enough sense to recognize good people and not make their campaigns a victim of this nonsense. We’re not going to throw out the baby with bathwater! In time, good sense will prevail and people of good will will make the right choice. In the meantime, we will continue to build the Constitution Party.

  11. Michael Says:

    For a person who said he didn’t want to speak to me again, you sure are saying a lot. (Paragraph) My info is from this and Michael Peroutka’s website. Perhaps you should try reading them? The C.P. is stronger? 1972 A.P. vote—1.4 million. Highpoint of the C.P.—1996—187,000. Michael

  12. Phil Sawyer Says:

    My friend, Don Lake, hit the nail on the head: “Reform Movement Disease (splinters of splinters).” This is a sad situation but not uncommon for new and/or growing (or shrinking) political parties.

    It does not seem to me that the Constitution Party is growing very much these days. That could change, though. I have been on record for a few years now as having predicted that the Republican Party will be a minor-sized party by 2012. Some group will move in to fill the vacuum. Will it be Constitution, America First, or what? Those “who snooze” will almost surely “lose.” At the present time, the best bet would be on the Libertarian Party to replace the Republican Party – especially with the new, more open-minded, attitude of the L.P. We shall see!

    Member: CUIP; GPUS; SPUSA; U08

  13. Joe Says:

    Jason,

    I don’t think that it is quite accurate to say that the Constitution Party has not addressed at all the withdrawal of four of its state affiliates. While I disagree with it, Jim Clymer’s “THE CONSTITUTION PARTY REMAINS TRUE ON THE LIFE ISSUE” editorial on their site is a response.

    I am a member of one of the affiliates that withdrew from Constitution Party. I don’t envision a rival “Constitution Party” presidential candidate in ‘08. Richard, as you well know we would need many, many more states than the current four to have a mathematical possibility of receiving enough electoral votes to win a presidential race. And not all of the states that have withdrawn have ballot access. Our state party intends to continue focusing on state and local races, just as we did before we separated from the Constitution Party.

    We discussed the name. Personally, I am not overly attached to it, but I am in a distinct minority in my state party on that score. Everybody else feels strongly that we should keep it.

  14. Otto Kerner Says:

    Chris Campbell:

    Prior to the split, both the state and federal parties were called “Constitution Party”. Why should the state party have to change its name?

  15. Sean Scallon Says:

    Really, does this mean anything at all outside of the Presidential nominating process for 2008? A state branch of CP decides to “disaffiliate” itself from the national party but instead of becoming a new party (which would mean it would have to start all over in terms of ballot access) it simply keeps the CP name, meaning well, marital separation instade of full-scale divorce.

    But in a way it just shows the CP was a loose party to begin with given that many of its state parties were once belonged to the IAP like Nevadas and were allowed to hold onto that name.

    I still think Jim Clymer made the right decision and this is all that comes of it, one can hardly say it cripple the party overall than having such state parties form an entirely new entity. Its juts means they won’t get any money from the national CP anymore and they can’t participate in the presidential nominating process. Their loss.

  16. Joe Says:

    Sean,

    What money from national? Affiliates are required to pay annual dues to national. Since I have been involved in my state party, we never received a dime from the Constitution Party. In addition to annual dues, the Constitution Party solicits donations from members. Presumably, most members of the state parties who separate will no longer be contributing to the national party. If there is any loss, it seems to me that it is on the part of the national party.

  17. RCAIP Says:

    I’m still optimistic,

    I think that something has got to give, perhaps the national Party could reform itself into a more right-wing populist political machine and undo its Theocratic extremist credentals. Otherwise it could very well go the way of the RfP.

    Also note, even though the AIP/ American Party split hurt the Party nationally in the 70’s. Today the AIP is 300,000+ reg. voters strong in California, while the American Party is somewhat smaller then the present Prohibition Party and has no ballot-access and hasn’t qualified a candidate on any ballot since 1996.

  18. Gary Odom Says:

    The reason the American Party withered and died is because, in December of 1972, it was taken over by a band of narrow- minded fanatics who insisted that everyone march in lockstep compliance with their narrow and extreme views. Their first act of supreme brilliance was to kick out three ballot qualified state parties who were in good standing, the Indiana American Independent Party, the Pennsylvania Constitutional Party and the South Carolina Independent Party, because the very capable leaders of these state parties were not viewed as pure enough idealogically and not in conformity and compliance with the narrow agenda of the new American Party national ledadership and were replaced with their cronies in those states who had no ballot qualification, no know- how, no nothin’. At about the same time these “inspired” leaders trashed George Wallace who won about 10 million popular votes and 45 electoral votes in 1968 and did extraordinarily well in the Democratic primaries in 1972 before he was shot. And regardless of what you may think about Wallace, in his campaigns he appealed to average working people across the country and he addressed many of their concerns as they faced their everyday walk through life. The American Party, 1973 disassociated themselves from Wallace because he and his supporters were not idealogically pure enough and were not in full compliance with their narrow views.

    Does any of this sound familiar? The Constitution Party and its national committee may the under attack by the same type of fanatical purists, but it has learned from history. It’s not always fun to suffer the slings and arrows, but in the end the reward will be to have a party that the average American can repair to when they have finally had enough of the disasterous direction of the big government imperialists/globalists of the Republican and Democratic Parties. Hopefully that day will come soon.

  19. Richard Winger Says:

    I would e-mail Gary Odom separately if I knew his e-mail address. His posting above says the Indiana American Independent Party was ballot-qualified, but it never had that status. It never polled one-half of 1% for Secretary of State. It didn’t run for that office in 1968 (back then it was up every two years), nor in 1970, nor in 1972.

  20. Gary Odom Says:

    Richard,

    I know that they were not qualified for the Presidential ballot, but it was my recollection that they were able to run state and local candidates. I will, however, defer to your recall and expertise on this matter. (I’d be crazy not to).

    By the way, all of us in third party politics owe an enormous debt to you for the information you have collected and dissemenated regarding ballot access over the years. You are without peer!

    I know, I know, I could thank you in a practical way by sending $ for a subscription to Ballot Access News. I will. Everybody else should, too!

    Political freedom never had a better friend!

  21. Adam Says:

    The Constitution Party has never had much of a rationale for existing. These little right-wing parties appear and disappear quite regularly.

    I can see one or two of the state affiliates surviving and becoming something like a right-wing version of Vermont’s Progressive Party – strong in a state with room for two right wing parties.

  22. Sean Scallon Says:

    My apologies Joe, I thought it was the other way around.

    What happened to the AP after its split with the AIP is a good example of what not to do for the Constitution Party.

    A few years ago the Washington branch of the CP disaffiliated itself from the CP because to explicity call itself a Christian political party. They tried to start a brand new party called the American Heritage Party. Needless to say, that didn’t catch fire and the CP was hardly ruptured by it. Now is a little more serious because it involves more states but so long as they don’t completly separate and I don’t think they will, the CP will survive. Few voters are going to care outside of us Third Party watchers whether or not the Montana CP is affiliated with the national party or not.

  23. Joe Says:

    Sean,

    I agree with you that few outside the Constitution Party will know or care. I’m not sure what you mean by “completely separate.” My state party voted to disaffiliate, we no longer any right to vote on anything the Constitution Party does, our state party site is no longer listed on the national site, and we are no longer referred prospective members in our state who visit the national party site. I can’t imagine what would make our separation any more complete than that.

  24. Josh Says:

    I’ve been a member of the CP since 2002 and I’ve done a lot of work to try and grow the party. Personally, I think this talk about forming a new party is foolish at best. As we’ve seen over the years, these “splinter parties” have done nothing but flop. Mark my words: whatever new political party that emerges from this mess will collapse like a house of cards. Anyone remember the American Heritage Party? The America First Party? The American Founding Fathers Party? ‘Nuff said.

    If certain state parties want to disaffiliate, then they should be doing it for the right reasons. In other words, they shouldn’t be doing it for the purpose of forming a brand new party. These disaffiliations should be done to send a message to National to shape up. The feasability of disaffiliation as a tactic notwithstanding, I’m just saying that it should be done for the right reasons.

    Personally, I’ve invested too much time, money, and effort into building the CP over the years to just bolt on it now. And by the way, I TOTALLY disagree with what happened at Tampa. I agree that we should remain as pure as possible with the life issue. However, I don’t think that forming a new party is wise or correct.

  25. Christopher Hansen Says:

    ndependent American Party Wins Big

    Felony Complaint to be Filed Against Lomax

    IAP Candidate Lance Hinton to be placed on November Ballot by Order of Judge Williams

    At a hearing on Thursday in Department 16, Judge Williams heard arguments as to whether or not he should issue a Writ of Mandamus requested by the Independent American Party and Lance Hinton to place Hinton’s name on the November Ballot for the office of Clark County Treasurer.

    Judge Williams heroically issued the Writ and Lance Hinton will now be the ONLY opposition to the current Treasurer. In the legal briefs the IAP had suggested that Harvard Lomax committed a felony by discouraging Hinton from registering to vote because of :

    NRS 293.5045 Voter registration agencies: Prohibited acts; penalty.

    1. A person who works in a voter registration agency shall not:

    (c) Make any statement or take any action to discourage an applicant from registering to vote;…

    2. A person who violates any of the provisions of this section is guilty of a category E felony and shall be punished as provided in NRS 193.130.

    Hinton wasted no time and filed for office just after the hearing was completed and the ruling had been made in his favor. “It’s done,” said Hinton with joy in his voice. “I am officially a candidate!”

    The good news for Hinton was just to opposite for Harvard Lomax. The REAL bad news for him came at the very end of the hearing when Christopher Hansen, one of the plaintiffs, asked Judge Williams if he had heard the judge correctly. Had Judge Williams really said, during the hearing, that Mr. Lomax’s action had caused a “chilling effect” on Mr. Hinton’s attempts to register to vote? Judge Williams confirmed those were indeed his words. An audible groan was heard from Lomax’s Deputy District Attorney as the judge finished. Christopher Hansen guessed, “She must know we are going to file charges for sure now.”

    “We were thrilled to hear the judge confirm what we already knew and that was that Lomax had “discouraged” Hinton from registering to vote. That was a felony and we are going to file charges against Lomax as soon as we get a copy of the transcript,” said Christopher Hansen, the state chairman for the IAP. “This petty tyrant has to know that he must follow the law, ALL of the law, and not just the sections he likes. He must stop trying to write law and just enforce it. Or better yet when the system is done with him maybe he will no longer be the Registrar of Voters but a convicted felon.”

    The charges will be filed with the Secretary of State since, by law (NRS 293.124), “the Secretary of State is responsible for the execution and enforcement of the provisions of title 24 of NRS and all other provisions of state and federal law relating to elections in this State.”

    The regulations for filing such a complaint are found at:

    NAC 293.025 Submission of complaint concerning violation of provision of title 24 of NRS. (NRS 293.124) A person who wishes to file a complaint concerning an alleged violation of any provision of title 24 of NRS must:

    1. Submit the complaint in writing to the Secretary of State; and

    2. Sign the complaint.

    The complaint may include proof of the alleged violation.

    There were also issues of the constitutionality of several laws but Judge Williams wisely decided that these issues need ed to be heard more fully and will be decided after more briefs are filed and arguments are made.

    Independent American Party candidate for Assessor and attorney in this case, Jonathan Hansen said, “We look forward to debating the constitutionality of these issues. The Independent American Party supports the integrity of the voting system and knows it must be secured. The present system, however, encourages fraud while discouraging honest people. We need a system that only allows Nevada Citizens to vote in Nevada.”

  26. Phil Sawyer Says:

    Once again, let me say that these sort of splits are, unfortunately, rather common among “third parties” in this country. Although it is sad (but fascinating) to observe these things happen – whether left, center, or right – the movement for political independence will go on.

    For the truth to be told, one would have to recognize that those groups who find it more rewarding to take merger action than splitting action will profit in the long run. It is tough work to hang in there and work together, sometimes, but it is the best way to proceed.

    Member: CUIP; GPUS; SPUSA; U08

    Former Member: Republican Party; Democratic Party; Committee for a Constitutional Presidency/McCarthy ‘76; Peace and Freedom Party (People’s Party); 1980 Committee; Communist Party USA; Citizens Party; Democratic Socialists of America; National Unity Party; New Democrats; United We Stand America; California Party (Independence Party); Patriot Party; Reform Party; New Frontier Coalition; American Independent Party (Constitution Party); and Natural Law Party.

  27. Austin Cassidy Says:

    Phil, I just have to point out how you stated that the CP affiliates should stick together and work toward a goal rather than splitting off into lots of different directions.

    And then you give a giant list of parties you’ve joined and left… running from both major parties to the Communists, to the Constitution Party and the Natural Law Party.

    It just seems a little… counter to your point, maybe?

  28. Joe Says:

    Josh,

    What talk about forming a new party? Our state party has talked about and decided that, if the right national party came along and invited us to join, we would consider it, but we aren’t in any hurry to jump into that again.

    And what do you mean by “Anyone remember the American Heritage Party? The America First Party?” The Founding Fathers Party may be defunct, but I have received mailings recently from both the AHP and the AFP.

  29. RCAIP Says:

    Exactely Gary!

  30. Christopher Hansen Says:

    I was and am in 100% compliance to the State of Nevada Platform and the National Platform AS IT IS WRITTEN.

    There are, even now, disagreements within the party as to what 100% pro-life even means as life of the mother is considered by many to not be an “exception” and therefore allowable.

    I want to end all abortions. EVERY SINGLE ONE. The question is not: “Is Christopher Hansen 100% pro-life?” The question is: “How is the end of all abortions to be accomplished.”

    The No Exceptionists way has been a 100% failure for 30 years. Why not try something new and see if we can take a bite out of abortion one step at a time like all other things in politics happen?

    Do we want to honestly stop abortions or do we just want to say we do while caling anyone that disagrees with our tactics a baby murderer?

    The No Exceptionist crowd has failed to get anything done and are now working to further limit themselves. They want to lose but feel good about it. Is it not time to let them and feel good about it?

    Let us start working with people that want to win and let those that like to feel good about losing lose on their own.

  31. Chris Campbell Says:

    Pleas es my other post, that on the Missouri article. No Exceptionism has never really had any chance to “get anything done”

    As for the LP, I work with them on common issues, but do not want to be a member of a party that is “the new, more open-minded, attitude of the L.P.” (Phil Sawyer)

    I disagree with Chris on some things, but have more in common with him than LP.

    Gary, give me a call if you would, I am interested in more details about the AIP split in 70’s, have not gotten much 411 on that time.

  32. Gary Odom Says:

    Will be happy to, would tomorrow AM be o.k.? I assume your phone number is listed on the NC website. If not I will get it elsewhere or email you or something. This just proves that, by living long enough, I can be of some use to somebody!

  33. Chris Campbell Says:

    Email me, via the address on national’s site and yes, If you wish to call, that will be fine-same place to reach me-either State or National site.

  34. Jason Says:

    The main issue I have here is, if you research the CP on the internet, Constitution Party and theocratic or theocrats come up way to often in the same sentence. So I ask what the NHQ is planning to do to counter this bad press. Why hasn’t more been said and done to state our case? Is this party theocratic in doctrine? If you are, that is your right but I would like to know. I am not interested in pressing the crown rights of the King; whatever that means. I don’t think Jesus is too concerned with being a member of the CP. To be perfectly honest with you, there is too much religion mixed with this party – and you can see the results of that. It was a bad idea to get involved in.

    Let’s just recognize God his beloved Son and principles (kind like the Constitution and Dec of Ind does) and leave it that. From there, we can move to strengthen the Constitutional awareness into national politics. Let’s leave the ideology for the bickers and the realism to the victors!

    I love lamp,

    Jason

  35. Phil Sawyer Says:

    Thanks for your question, Austin. If I could be allowed to be a little on the picky side, I think that I implied, rather than stated, that the various state Constitution Parties ought to stay together and try harder to work out their differences. Furthermore, I meant to imply, also, that they more actively look into merger opportunities with like-minded parties (such as the America First Party; the New Frontier Coalition; etc.). These hopes of mine, you may file under the “reasonable but not realistic expectations” category.

    With regard to my history of belonging to so many different parties (some, more than one episode), I have to say that each one was a truly wonderful and educational experience. There are things that I agree with in most political parties (other than the ones that preach violence, racism, sexism, etc.). There is no party that I agree with on everything. That is okay. If we all could create our own political parties, there would be way too many of them.

    My hope is to settle down, for a very long time, with my current affiliations. Of course, I always hope that!

    One other organization that I belonged to but forgot to mention last night: Progressive Coordinating Council – Northern California (affiliated, nationally, with the Progressive Coordinating Council; and, in Sacramento, a member of the Coalition for Progressive Politics). This was back in the late Seventies – when the word, “progressive,” actually meant something.

    By the way, do you have a spell checker on this thing? The printing is so tiny that it is real hard to do it manually!

  36. Josh Says:

    Joe,

    I was under the impression that there is going to be a meeting this month (in Michigan, if I remember correctly) to talk about forming a new national political party. I suppose this meeting has been under wraps for quite some time, hence there aren’t too many people who know about it. Nonetheless, I think its foolish.

    I understand that the AHP and AFP still exist, but I pointed them out as examples of parties that have gone nowhere. Frankly, they’re a joke. I don’t say that to be mean; just calling a spade, a spade. I would hate to see good people misled into such a venture where they end up wasting their talent.

  37. Phil Sawyer Says:

    Another new political party? Why?

    Well, I suppose that if there is a strong group of people (with something new to say), then more power to them. Go for it!

    Hope they know that it will not be easy.

  38. flash mp3 player codes Says:

    ODM - Multimedia chip offers

    ODM - Multimedia chip offers next-generation video and audio featuresElectropages (press release), UK -Mar 5, 2007Imagine the transformation from a basic MP3

Leave a Reply