Usually when I describe Log Cabin’s coming gathering in San Diego, I make sure to put the word “convention” in quotation marks. The reason I do so is that at most organizations’ conventions, the assembled delegates, representatives of chapters around the country, vote on the organization’s platform, policy statements, resolutions and/or other proposals to set its agenda for the coming year. And they elect national officers.
At the Log Cabin “convention” later this week in San Diego, we will be doing no such thing. There will be one session called the “Road Ahead” where participants will have a chance to offer “input about Log Cabin’s role in the presidential election.” But, the delegates won’t get to vote on that role. It will be left to the unelected Board to determine whether or not the ostensibly Republican organization will be endorsing the party’s nominee in this fall’s campaign.
As a result, “convention” participants don’t really have much of a stake in the proceedings. As they don’t really have much say over the direction of the organization.
Shortly after Log Cabin ran a series of ads attacking then-GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney, we not only wondered who was paying for their ads, we also questioned why Log Cabin was running them.
Turns out we weren’t the only ones. I learned later that several club presidents (and other local leaders) were not happy with the ad campaign. And even though they represent the organization in various jurisdictions around the country — and are actually elected by their members — they heard about them the same time we did. (And like us, they too wondered who was paying for the ads.)
The Board approved the ads. Just as it sets the organization’s agenda. But, unlike those club leaders, Board members are not elected by Log Cabin members. It seems they’re a self-perpetuating lot, but I’m not really sure how they’re chosen as I can’t find Log Cabin’s bylaws on the web (though I did find the Bylaws of the Virginia chapter which I wrote back in 1997, though amended slightly since then).
Up until 1999, chapters (in regional groupings) elected half the Board. At a recent meeting of the LA chapter, I promised Board Vice-Chair Terry Hamilton to become a Log Cabin Trustee, contributing a minimum of $1,200 to the organization should they return to that pre-1999 practice. (I saw this here to show how serious I was when I made that commitment.)
While the past two presidents of Log Cabin have been more responsive to club leaders (even to organization critics) than was the national leadership when I held a local leadership role in the late 1990s, it is the Board which sets policy.
I believe Log Cabin would be better served if its “convention” this week were a real convention where delegates debated resolutions and policies, set priorities for the coming year, chose its national leadership team and elected Board members. I would be delighted to generously support an organization where the grassroots had a say in the national organization’s leadership and direction.
Until that time, it’s the national Board which defines Log Cabin. And not its membership.
Um, you’re not exactly selling me on joining the LCR here. Are you going just to hear the speakers?
Yeah I remember you and I were talking during the Romney attacks. It was during that kerfuffle that one of the Tampa Bay guys told me that the agenda comes from the top down instead of the other way around. LCR doesn’t use “grassroots” anywhere, do they?
So isn’t it time for an organization of Gay Republicans that are actual like, Republicans? And freely elected by the members? Is that too much to ask?
Naturally Gay, going to hear John Bolton speak and perhaps find something to blog about.
And Etain, I share your concern, but it would take a lot of work to set up such a group. And not a small amount of money.
Well, LCR is clearly worse than having no organization at all. It doesn’t serve the needs of actual gay republicans, it serves the purposes of its unelected board, which are clearly not in line with the Republican Party.
Am I wrong here? It seems like a mistake to legitimize this group by attending its events…?
I NOMINATE DAN!!! Anybody second the motion?
How big “D” Democratic. Maybe they will open to the platform to votes if they can have super-delegates?
The changes started before 2000. Rich and Kevin wanted to make sure we endorsed Bush – I was on the national board then not an employee. When Patrick G took the helm he put friends on the board – as did I as an employee – Brian Ballard, Marc Yeager and others. It is natural to have people you know and trust on the board. But it has transformed the organization to a top down NOT grassroots centered operation. As I recall then COO Dwight Lodge remarked that it costs the national organization everytime we started a new club. With tough time raising money the national office could not/would not focus on new chapters but focused on trying to influence GOP leaders on the hill and off. Claims that the organization doubled are patently false. While donations were up “memberships”, however you define it – did not double.
I think the more troubling news about where LCR stands today is that straight GOP leaders simply don’t believe that LCR is relevant. Truly, friends who know I used to be involved ask, quite sincerely, Is Log Cabin still around?
With HRC spending their efforts pushing the other HRC it would seem like a perfect time to fill the vacuum on the hill but I know the current leadership is doing all they can with precious few resources. That has not changed with LCR for the entire time it has been around.
If I remember correctly, the LCR-Natl Business Meeting…whatever THAT was….was held last month in Phoenix or someplace-similarily inconvenient. I remember last year being surprised that there were NO business sessions on the Natl. Convention agenda…even closed-ones. Every-other “membership club” that I belong to has atleast one business or open-Board Mtg. at their national gathering where there’s at-leat the attempt to report to the members-present on the health of the organization and to discuss or propose policy or business matters. The LCR is closed-loop with little or no accountability to it’s membership, and totally-opaque governance. As I remember, it used to be that if you were at one of the higher-level memberships you had some voting-rights…now you just get promised “access” to the Board.
I’m not attending this year due to my dead-beat clients who have decided that I’m a bank…so my cash-flow is severely-crimped. Rent and keeping the office lights “on” has priority; but you have my blessing to raise bloody-hell. Grassroots should be their focus; not the Beltway cocktail circuit.
And here in NJ they (LCR-Natl) can’t even organize a cocktail party to jump-start a local chapter….
Ok.
What about a GayPatriot PAC for starters? You guys have the contacts and the wherewithal. Or, at least, more than I do.
I’m sure you’ll keep us informed. I look forward to reading your thoughts about it. I hope LCR posts some videos of the speeches as they have done in the past.
A GAYPATRIOT PAC! Now there is a good idea… I happen to have some experience in running a PAC, too.
Hmmmm……
The national board is made up of people who donate at least $25K of their own funds or someone who can raise $25K. Money talks, there is no elections, or accountability for that matter. Most of those people are well-heeled, successful types (the typical Republicans in some minds) There are many of us in the struggling chapters out in the hinterlands who are not those “rich Republican types” who try to grow the chapters, made in-roads at the local levels, work to dispel the “Are they still around” notion and help change hearts and minds of local and state GOP and deal with the vitriol of the gay left. There are really two organizations, the national office and the chapters.
I see a fundmental flaw in the whole notion of an organization like Log Cabin Repubcans… and it’s the last word.. Republicans.
That means the organization is tying itself to the condition of a political party.
To me , there is nothing nobel or inspiring about this. As a conservative , I base my “allegience” (affliation is probably a better word) not to a party, but to a set of ideas.
Thus I aim to achieve the goals of the ideas… I dont aim to help the fortunes of a party organization.
I already spend my daytime devoted to enriching another organization just for the sake of it being an organization.. my employer. There’s nothing special about what my company does. And likewise that’s how I feel about the Republican Party and the continiously disappointing political leaders going back to the 90s.
To be honest I really have no clue what the core values of the LCRs are. Are they a partisan group devoted to the Republican Party? Are they a coalition of people who reject the Democrat Party? Are they conservatives? Are they RINOs? Are they a counterpart to identiy-based Lefty groups?