There are no rules regarding voting, never have been, and the rules committee can not bind the convention.

The actual complaint here is that there is a last minute attempt to change the potential rules as generally understand as potentially applicable.

On Saturday, I and the other delegates will have an opportunity to set the rules ourselves. Neither the Committee (through the call), nor the rules committee have bound me or the remaining delegates to a majority or plurality vote.

It took a little while to wrap my head around the logic but I understand it. It’s not that rules committee has inherent power, it is that the delegates to the convention have the inherent power.

This is the equivalent of a shareholder meeting, or in the case of a non-stock corporation, a general member ship meeting. Although the leadership has the power and duty to call the meeting, and they can propose an agenda and rules, only the shareholders/membership can actually set the rules.

So the method of voting mentioned in the call was never actually binding, and the candidates (on some level) should have known that.

The other thing for the casual traveler to keep in mind is the rules committee can only propose rules on behalf of the District Committee. Only once accepted by the delegates at the convention, can those rules be binding.

If only for entertainment value, I look forward to any internecine procedural chicanery.

This is the equivalent of a shareholder meeting, or in the case of a non-stock corporation, a general member ship meeting. Although the leadership has the power and duty to call the meeting,

“Congressional District Committee can prescribe binding rules of voting for a Congressional District Convention in the Call of the Convention. My opinion is that a Congressional District Committee cannot dictate the rules that govern the Convention in the Call or otherwise, including the rule governing vote thresholds, because the Convention itself retains authority to determine its own rules (so long as the rules adopted are consistent with the Party Plan, local bylaws, and Roberts Rules, in that order). Article VIII, Sec. J.1., and prior General Counsel opinions, make clear that the role of the Congressional District Committee is to propose rules to the Convention’s Rules Committee, but thereafter the Rules Committee decides which rules to report to the Convention as a whole, and the Convention as a whole has authority to determine its own rules, by voting either to adopt the Rules Committee’s report or to amend the Rules Committee’s report. The vote of the Convention to adopt Convention rules is a majority vote (unless a particular rule would, under Roberts Rules require a two-thirds vote, such as a vote to limit debate, in which case that rule will require a two-thirds vote for adoption).
There are a few exceptions to this general rule. For example, the Party Plan expressly grants authority to establish pre-filing requirements to the Congressional District Committee planning the Convention, and prior General Counsel opinions conclude that pre-filing requirements stated and published in a Call are binding on the Convention. A rule governing voting thresholds at the Convention is not a power granted to the Congressional District Committee. Therefore, that kind of rule is within the province of the Convention itself.”

But this doesn’t explain why so much time has passed from the meeting that recommended a majority vote and this realization that the rules weren’t followed. The argument that the public decision which resulted from a public call should not be ignored is a compelling one. I’m not sure if there is any precedent to back that argument and proposed rules just proposed at that stage. Whether or not the expectations which came from the decisions of a public vote supersede correcting a procedural mistake may not be fully resolved because the convention is this Saturday. I’m not sure how I feel but I’m leaning toward arguing that it’s too late to scrap the majority vote decision. If a mistake was made then that’s too bad, it should not have been made in the first place but months rolled off the calendar giving everyone involved a chance to correct this. The problem is who has standing to claim any damage here. Also, why have a democratic meeting if the rules committee can act like kings later on?
I wonder if this will result in the last minute formation of coalitions. But I expect half the crowd will not notice that a potential floor fight could break out and they’ll just causally vote for the plan that gets everyone out of there the quickest.

“it’s for the temporary rules committee to decide, which is consistent with RPV Counsel’s ruling.”

Are you saying this is what people were simply saying at the FCRC meeting, or are you saying there is an objectively identifiable written ruling from RPV counsel that you may have even seen?

If it is the latter, please post.

Thanks for the inside info. If it truly is a decision that will be made before further balloting, I agree most delegates will choose plurality over multiple ballots.