Watching a show on PBS this past weekend with my kids I was reminded of the marvelous heritage the Forefathers of our great nation left us - one that we have sadly squandered over the past sixty or so years.

I feel the need to address some issues and questions that were raised as a result of my last posting titled "The Death of a Party". In that column I provided my insight and opinion of what took place at the recent Constitution Party National Committee meeting. It was the most read column I have published, and sent my unique hit counter over 1,000. I believe my opinions about life and liberty are far more profound, but I understand the climate and can certainly live with this short-term popularity.

I received twenty replies and three subscription requests after publishing my last piece. Of the replies, and questions there-in, I will address what I believe to be the most pertinent.

One gentleman asked if I thought the Constitution Party was dead or dying. My answer is, "I don't know". On a national level the CP is dead to me and it will be interesting to see how they fare going forward. Yes, I do intend to keep tabs on them for my own interest. The bigger question, I believe, has to do with the various state affiliates. After all, membership is with your state organization, not the national one. It's too bad we don't have as many members as we do people who have voted for CP candidates, then we would truly be the "Third largest", but that's a point I'll address later.

The Constitution Party of Wisconsin, where my membership is until the end of the year, has been holding steady over the past four years. We always see a jump in membership and support in major election years but on the average things haven't changed. It will be as interesting to see how the recent events at the national level will affect local memberships.

Another comment I received was along the lines of my opinion being off base and the CP is still the best vehicle for restoring our Republic.

To that I say, first, this is "my" opinion and it doesn't matter to me if anyone else thinks I'm off base. Second, and more to the point, there was a time not so long ago when I agreed with the opinion that, besides its flaws, the CP was the best chance we had. Well, I'm not so sure I was right in that thinking. I believed the CP was something that it isn't. I believed the Constitution Party was a place for principled individuals where politicking was looked down upon and statesmanship was to be exalted. Let me list some examples of how wrong I was:

On June 17th, 2006, the Idaho state affiliate, planning a vote to disaffiliate at their State Convention, was taken over by compromising national sympathizers.
Here's how:

• Rose Johnson, Mary Rutkowski, and at least two other people appointed themselves as Convention Registrars and completely took over the registration activities when, in fact, three people had already been legally and officially selected as Registrars at the State Central Committee meeting two weeks prior.
• Rose Johnson misrepresented herself as a duly authorized Officer of the party responsible for coordinating the facility arrangements to the personnel at the Elks Lodge in Grangeville in order to have the doors opened early so that she and others could position themselves as Registrars. This has been verified with the Elks Lodge.
• These self-appointed Registrars accepted new membership forms at the door, effectively stacking the deck with an audience of their liking and thereby thwarted the efforts of the legitimately elected and duly appointed people in Idaho. These actions are not only wrong ethically and quite probably legally, but are certainly not indicative of a true Christian spirit.

On June 24th, 2006, the Missouri state affiliate voted unanimously to disaffiliate from the CP National; However...

• Just prior to that vote the former Vice-chair, Ms. Donna Ivanovich, not happy with the decision to vote for disaffiliation, resigned her position with the Party.
• Following her resignation she accessed the CPMO web site and changed the credentials, effectively locking out the Chairman, Dr. Curtis Frazier, from making changes to his own web site. (You may remember Dr. Frazier as the 2000 Vice-Presidential running mate of Howard Phillips.)
• Following Ms. Ivanovich's usurpation of the web site she went to the Missouri Secretary of State's office and incorporated the name "Constitution Party of Missouri". This is key since the Missouri Disaffiliate Resolution stated, in part "that the CP of Missouri disaffiliate or withdraw from participation with the national Constitution Party, while the former retains the name "Constitution Party of Missouri";
• After unethically and possibly illegally securing the CPMO name for herself, Ms. Ivanovich then used the web site to call for a state-wide meeting in which she was elected the new "Chair" of the "new" CPMO.
• On December 1, 2006, the CP National Committee voted to accept this bastard child as the official affiliate in Missouri.

Now I don't have a problem if Ms. Ivanovich wants to start her own political party and affiliate with the CP under a different name, but her certainly unethical, and probably illegal, actions are indicative of the personality that now represents the CP. She should have been called to task but the CP leadership accepted and promoted her!

Finally, the Ohio matter.

At the CP National Committee meeting in Tampa this past spring, after the failed vote to disaffiliate the IAP of Nevada, the NC voted to adopt a new Standing Rule which stated, in brief, "that no vote to disaffiliate a state organization from the National Committee can take place unless a petition, signed by at least one half of the NC members from at least one half of the affiliated states, is submitted to the Executive Committee at least two weeks prior to the next NC meeting."

Well, Ohio voted for that Standing Rule then went home and voted to "withdraw" from active participation in CP National activities. Realistically, they did this with full knowledge that they would be "removed", but it was done anyway to show the hypocrisy of the Executive Committee.

Their "withdrawal" included not sending any apportionments, no dues or National Committee reps would be forthcoming, etc. Chairman Jim Clymer decided, on his own authority, that the withdrawal was really intended to be a disaffiliation, even though a letter accompanying the Resolution stated clearly that Ohio was not disaffiliating. Chairman Clymer subsequently appointed a new state contact for Ohio.

There are only six states that have paid their apportionments in 2006 and certainly not every state sends representatives to the National Committee meetings. In its Withdrawal Resolution Ohio was putting itself squarely in the center of the majority of state affiliates. That is, most do not send any money or people to the National Committee, yet Ohio was singled out for putting such in writing and was thusly removed.

The Constitution of the CP National Committee states that only the National Committee has the authority to appoint or revoke affiliate status, and the CP Bylaws state that there can be only one recognized affiliate per state.

Considering no less than six states disaffiliated over the summer you would think that a vote by the National Committee to recognize these disaffiliations would have been on the agenda in Concord. I mean, the governing rules state very clearly that only the NC has the authority to revoke affiliate status. Even if a state voluntarily withdraws, unaffiliates, disaffiliates, whatever you want to call it, the National Chairman has no authority in the governing documents to accept that - only the National Committee itself has that authority. And until such is accepted, to appoint or recognize a new contact or affiliate is Out Of Order!

The Chairman may appoint a state contact where none exists previously, but to appoint someone in a state where there is an affiliate is absolutely against the Constitution, Bylaws and Standing Rules of the Constitution Party.

My favorite quote regarding all this was from an unnamed person stating, "Who said it was hard for National to disaffiliate a State Party? It is as easy as making a stroke with a pen. James Clymer has declared Ohio disaffiliated, even though they themselves were careful not to do so."

This is what I meant when I stated that the Constitution Party is no longer a place for principled individuals. To conclude that thought, here's some of what Chairman Clymer himself had to say regarding my last column in response to a question posed to me about all the "procedural tricks" used in Concord:

"One of the reasons you had trouble following "all the procedural tricks" was because there weren't any. Everything done was transparent and above board. That doesn't mean everybody liked the outcomes but just because you lose on a vote doesn't mean that something nefarious occurred procedurally. The truth is, those of us who were present at the meeting have a hard time recognizing the meeting described by Dan Hoyt. His account was a mixture of distortions, half-truths and misrepresentations, cast so as to make virtually everything that happened as sinister and designed to present the entire meeting in the worst possible light. He obviously went to the meeting with that in mind and not to do offer anything constructive. Everyone I talked to at the meeting was pleased with the spirit of the meeting and some said it was the best national committee meeting they had ever attended, or at least the best in a long time.

Jim Clymer"

Well Mr. Clymer, I've pointed out where you were procedurally "out of order" and please enlighten me to what you have perceived as "half-truths" that I may print the "whole truth".

I'm not alone in how I saw the meeting and people I've spoken to, who were also in attendance, have told me so. I think the reason people you spoke to were pleased with the meeting is that everyone with principle has left, or been uninvited speaking of Michael Peroutka, and there was nothing left for the remaining pluralists and compromisers to argue about.

Also, there were less than 70 people at the National Committee meeting in Concord. That's almost 40% fewer people than have historically attended these meetings since I've been going over the past five years. And considering the National Committee roster used to consist of 298 names I find it interesting that, except for National Conventions, you've never even had a majority in attendance. Yet I don't see anyone calling for the disaffiliation of other states who don't participate…

I titled this column "Remembering Sacrifices" because over the past eight years I have sacrificed a great deal for the Constitution Party. I know everyone reading this has as well, some much more than I ever could. I pray that our past sacrifices will not be in vain as were those of our Forefathers. They left us a legacy that is no more, except on paper in the form of the Constitution. Take a moment to read the Declaration of Independence - just Google it and read it. The items redressed by our founders are quite similar to what we live with now, but there is no pending revolution. No mass movement among the people to speak out against the evils of our nation. No cry of remorse over our sins; just ignorance and apathy.

As to my own legacy, I wish I could say that I have done some "great" things that will leave this world a little better than when I came into it - not for myself but for my children and grandchildren. But as sad as the moral decline of our nation, I have witnessed the decline of the Constitution Party to nothing more than a group of individuals who are willing to compromise on key issues for the sake of a title - meaningless words.

They are the "Third Largest Political Party by Voter Registration", never mind the fact that those in California and Nevada who register with those affiliates have no idea they are themselves affiliating with a political party…

My family has sacrificed too, as I'm sure many of you reading this can relate to. I have put the resources of my time, talents and treasurers into something I believed would make a difference, only to be verbally slapped in the face for standing true to my principles. I hold no ill-will towards any whom I have met along the way. Most are great patriots in their own right and I am a better person for having met and worked with them. But there comes a time when God calls a man back home and for me that time is now.

I've been telling people that I would provide details as to why I'm leaving the CPoW so I will say this much to that end; my wife has been diagnosed with Chronic Liver Failure in the form of NASH. The specialist she was referred to has given her between 8-15 years before she'll need a liver transplant. 15 if she takes good care and 8 (or less) if she doesn't. He also said that most people with this do not make it to the transplant since something else takes them down first. My wife's liver is not cleansing the blood as it should and, as such, she can't take any medication (aspirin, Tylenol, antibiotics, nothing) as that would excel the time frame to transplant by further damaging her liver.

My wife and I have talked about what all this means and God has given her a wonderful spirit of acceptance and a strong will to fight this. We have four children ages 7, 5, 2 and 1 and in all likelihood I will be seeing my two youngest through their teenage years as a single father. With these things in mind I will no longer be able to continue as a member of the Constitution Party of Wisconsin.

I will, with my wife's help, continue to raise our children with knowledge of God's Word, the Bible, and the grace He has given us through His Son, Jesus Christ. I will, with His help, instill in them a sense of patriotism and a complete knowledge of how our country came to be. I will not let this rest!

Perhaps you will see the name "Hoyt" on the national scene again - I don't know if, or when. Perhaps the name in front of "Hoyt" will be "Daniel", perhaps my son Isaiah will take my place. Only God knows and we pray for His blessing as we move into this new season of life.

=============================================================
If you enjoy these commentaries and have not already subscribed to the list, click here to be added and you will receive an email notice when a new post is available.

If you have subscribed in the past and no longer wish to receive these commentaries then click here to be removed from the list. You will receive one final message confirming your desire to be removed.

If you aren't sure how you came to receive this then perhaps someone you know forwarded it to you. Please feel free to forward this message with the SUBSCRIBE / UNSUBSCRIBE info in tact. Always use Bcc: and clean up a message before you forward it. No one likes scrolling through forwards or reading between all the >>> junk. Thank you for your support!