As a lifelong conservative Republican and frequent delegate to county and state Republican conventions, I make three comments about Arturo Morales-LLan’s misuse of data and concept in his attack on the Count My Vote compromise ("The caucus and convention system had it right," Oct. 8):
1. That winning 57 percent of the geographic territory of the 3rd Congressional District somehow relates to the voice of the people. The constitution defines the rights of the people, not of acreage.
2. That the history of the caucus and convention system proves “that convention delegates are in touch with the majority of Republican Party voters.” History proves the exact opposite. From Sen. Bob Bennett (hugely popular with party members but ousted in convention) to Gov. Gary Herbert (popular sitting governor beaten badly in convention but won easily in primary) to Chris Herrod (won in convention, lost in primary) results have proven that convention delegates are in tune with a fragment of the party but not with the full party.
3. That “vetting” that occurs in party caucuses creates a more informed and more wise selection of candidates than would occur by the direct voice of the full party. That is a sad joke. After you select your precinct’s delegates, how much do you know about their opinions on clean air, education funding, the homeless crisis, Medicaid expansion, tax policy, highway needs or any of the other critical issues that we face? The meeting format given to precinct chairs is chock full of hype worthy of a high school pep rally but devoid of real vetting. “Vetting” is now code for “I’m more worthy to control the Republican Party than are the rank and file members.”
Gimme a break and tell the truth.