Dear editor:
Our Wyoming Republican Party and the new candidate endorsement policy is going to disenfranchise a large percentage of Wyoming Republicans, and the justifications for this change may not be valid.
For those who have not heard: The Wyoming Republican Party Central Committee has determined that they speak for all Republicans and intend to “endorse” their preferred candidates for some/all(?) races ahead of the primary election. This may include financial support and other resources for those preferred candidates. This is counter to traditional practice of remaining neutral as a party until after the primary.
The brand-new policy has not been shared with the general public, or even registered Republican voters.
I readily admit I was not on the floor when all of this was debated at the recent GOP convention, but I have heard numerous explanations for the change. Color me skeptical.
“We need to vet the candidates” is an often-repeated first argument. But the candidates have their issues, beliefs, etc., on full display. It’s called campaigning! We vet them with our vote in the primary.
“We don’t want our candidate selected with a minority of the votes”. I can respect this concern, but the endorsement process is minority selection on steroids. Rather than all voting Republicans selecting the candidate, a small group of GOP party members endorse their preferred candidate for us. The Wyoming Republican Party is not preventing anyone from running, but an official GOP endorsement of one candidate is a significant advantage. If they are going to provide other resources to that candidate, it will be more of an advantage. Does it influence the integrity of our elections?
Another rationale; “Our endorsement policy is sorta how Iowa does it.” No, it is not how Iowa does it! Iowa political parties remain neutral until after the primary but have a 35% minimum vote requirement to move forward to the general election. If nobody reaches 35%, the nominee is not decided by a runoff election. Instead, the party chooses the nominee at a party convention.
“48 states already have an endorsement policy” is often-repeated, as if Wyoming is way behind the mainstream in our candidate selection process. A little online research would suggest that our new way of picking party candidates most closely mimics the New York system and is not common across the U.S.
New York’s system is unusual because party organizations—especially county party committees—have a lot of influence before voters ever see a ballot. New York party leaders often choose an “official” candidate and formally endorse a candidate before the primary.
Now I know some may want Wyoming to be more like New York, but for me, I much prefer the individual voter deciding which candidate to support.
Sincerely,
Frank Moore,
Douglas
