Regarding the April 13, 2025, RPW Bylaw Revisions 

I oppose them. If given the opportunity, I would have voted—and argued—against their adoption. The changes are overly broad in some areas and regressive in others.

If you are interested in reading the RPW bylaws, you can find them HERE. Articles VII and VIII are relevant. I’ve attached a screenshot of the email sent out by RPW alerting membership to the bylaw changes as well.

The new bylaws do two main things:

• Establish a formal process for removing party leadership.
• Create a code of conduct for party leaders.

On Removal Procedures

Leadership removal can now be initiated in two ways:

• A complaint from five Executive Committee members, or
• A complaint from three elected Republicans at the state or federal level.

The new process for removing party leadership can now be triggered in one of two ways: either by five members of the Executive Committee submitting a formal complaint with a stated basis for removal, or by three elected Republicans at the state or federal level doing the same. Once submitted, the complaint goes to the Constitution Committee, which will vote—by simple majority—on whether to move it forward to a full Executive Board hearing. At that hearing, the accused will have an opportunity to respond to the charges, and removal will require a 3/5 vote of those Executive Board members present.

I strongly oppose the provision allowing three elected officials to initiate a removal process. It flips accountability backwards—elected officials answer to their constituents, not the other way around. That any three Republicans at the state or federal level can trigger this process is, at best, misguided and should be removed from the bylaws as soon as possible. While these officials don’t vote on removal, their power to initiate it is inappropriate.

Prudent checks and balances are essential—the Founding Fathers certainly thought so. I do, however, believe that the 3/5 threshold should be the harder-to-reach 2/3.

On the Code of Conduct

Some provisions of the new code of conduct are sensible, like requiring adherence to party constitutions or prohibiting financial misconduct. However, others seem more concerned with consolidating power than building a principled party. I’ll highlight just a few.

For example, prohibiting leaders from “publicly defaming Republican elected officials” is both ambiguous and troubling. This provision is not only silly but also dangerous and hard to define.

There have always been ill-meaning and deceitful critics who criticize as an act of self promotion—but banning criticism entirely while allowing the criticized to trigger removal? That’s power politics at its worst. This rule needs to go as quickly as possible.

Other problematic clauses include bans on:

• Using RPW-affiliated social media for purposes “in conflict with the mission” of the RPW.
• Pursuing an agenda that “conflicts with the goals and mission” of the RPW.