Crazyworld

It’ll be interesting to watch the race between Rick Beltram and LaDonna Ryggs play out.

The two are (so far) the only announced candidates for Spartanburg County Republican Party chairman. Beltram currently holds the seat; Ryggs currently represents this county on the state GOP executive committee.

I asked Ryggs this week why she was running. She ran through her credentials, what she thought she could bring to the table — things like team-building, transparency and a good working relationship with elected officials and the state party — and stressed the need for county chairmen to stay neutral during Republican primaries. She made it a point to say that she will not recruit challengers to run against Republican incumbents. And she talked about growing the party.

“The idea is that you’re propelling it (the county party) forward, that you want to move Spartanburg forward. It’s not taking anything away from what’s there or what’s been done, it’s bringing people back who used to be there and bringing new people in — using new technology and other methods to bring people in.”

She continued: “2010 is extremely important. The No. 1 focus will not be to sit on our hands. It will be to re-elect Jim DeMint, and by the largest margin possible. He’s our champion in the Senate. But he’s out there all alone sometimes. And the other focus will be to continue (Gov. Mark) Sanford’s agenda of conservative government and government reform. He can’t run again, but whoever is in his place needs to make sure that agenda pushes forward. And we have to make sure it is a conservative Republican who gets in. And so far, from who I’ve seen is running, it will be.”

The sitting-on-the-hands reference begged for a response.

Said Beltram: “First, we talk about not taking a position in a primary, and then she turns around and endorses Jim DeMint — who may have a primary. Second, the new people we have coming in are doing so because of the product we’ve delivered. As far as recruiting people against incumbents, of course, that’s nothing I’ve ever done.”

He continued: “The main thing is she’s already endorsing Jim DeMint before there’s even been a primary. So she contradicts her own statement. The other thing is our (state) party chairman was pretty clear about not having elected officials interfere in our process, and Jim DeMint turned around and completely ignored our chairman. And we, as county party chairmen, work more for our state party chairman than we do elected officials. And the final thing is, everything I’ve just heard is directly out of the Kevin Hall playbook. When we’re on the campaign trail, both Karen and myself talk about DeMint shouldn’t have gotten involved in our process, and Kevin says the opposite.”

Hall has said he’s staying out of county party races and wishes both Beltram and Ryggs the best.

I imagine if you’ve made it this far into the blog, you’re familiar with what Beltram is referring to regarding DeMint. If not, click here.

As I was talking with Beltram, he faxed over an agenda for Tuesday night’s meeting.

In large type at the bottom of the page: “URGENT NOTE!!! ALL PRECINCTS MUST BE PRESENT TO CURE ANY IRREGULARITIES IN RE-ORGANIZATION PACKETS TO COMPLETE CREDENTIALS FOR COUNTY CONVENTION.”

As noted already, Beltram is trying to force a debate with Ryggs Tuesday. She has prior commitments that night.

I’m by no means an expert on party rules, but I believe only precinct presidents (or vice-presidents) and secretaries need to be present in case of irregularities. Again, I'm not sure. I asked Beltram what he meant by “irregularities,” and he said missing signatures or forms, problems with voter identification numbers and “handwriting issues” could all constitute being irregular. I asked why he didn’t make a list of precincts that had issues available now (or at least before Tuesday night) so people could take care of whatever needs taking care of, and he said it would take that long to finish going through all the paperwork and compile a list.

Now, I’m not trying to put words in anyone’s mouth, but it seems likely Beltram’s opponents will look at this with high degree of suspicion — with the idea that he’s trying to stack the deck, or exclude people from the process. After all, there has been (and continues to be) an organized effort to remove him from office. And part of that effort involved getting people out to precinct organization so that they could be delegates to the county, and possibly state, convention.

When confronted with this, Beltram said, “They can say what whatever they want to say — that we’re inaccurate, that we’re in the ghetto, whatever. Actually, it’s just the opposite. This procedure is to make sure people are not excluded. ...This is an attempt a week before the convention to make sure no one gets thrown out.”

I haven't had a chance to talk with Ryggs since getting the announcement. But because it could potentially affect a few hundred people, I wanted to put something out there. 

And wait, there’s more,

The Republican president of the West View B Precinct has called a meeting Monday night and invited Beltram and Ryggs. He said both have given him verbal confirmation they will be there. Both will be allowed to make brief opening and closing statements, and “a few” questions will be asked. It’s at the west-side library at 525 Oak Grove Road. The venue seats about 100 people, and preference will be given to county delegates.

Still, Beltram said, “That doesn’t include the party as a whole, The only fair thing is for all the candidates to show up the next night.”

To be continued, I’m sure.

(By the way, I'm basically blogging about this between working on stories for the paper or from home. If you want to weigh in on this -- and potentially be quoted -- feel free to call me at 864-562-7214 or e-mail jason.spencer@shj.com.)

It’s a wild time to be involved in Republican politics in this corner of South Carolina.

About 300 people packed into the Country Hearth Inn last night, trying to organize their precincts and begin the process of having a say in county and state party leadership. And an estimated 300 people organized earlier this month, in parking lots or anywhere else they could find due to snow- and ice-covered roads.

Spartanburg County GOP Chairman Rick Beltram spent much of the first part of the night screaming into a half-working microphone, trying to corral people from about 80 (out of 92) precincts together to organize. Some in the crowd were disgusted. Others were confused. I heard the phrase "organized chaos" bandied about several times. Most simply wanted to get on with it, get their paperwork filled out and get home.

Beltram is at the center of a political maelstrom right now. He’s seeking re-election as county party chairman -- the vote is April 7 -- and he’s also touring the state in a quest to win chairmanship of the South Carolina Republican Party. The state GOP convention is in May.

He’s facing opposition on both fronts. So far, LaDonna Ryggs, the sitting committeeman for the county GOP and immediate past president of the S.C. Federation of Republican Women, is running against Beltram for his county seat. Gary Coats, head of the local Young Republicans group, is looking at the numbers and deciding whether he wants jump in. At least one other name has been floated.

The statewide race, which has gotten more attention -- though, frankly, it hasn’t gotten as much as I’d have thought -- pits Beltram against Columbia attorney Kevin Hall and Spartanburg businesswoman Karen Floyd.

One strategy that’s playing out is an attempt to knock Beltram out on the county level. The thinking behind this is that would hurt his viability as a statewide candidate.

“The only one who wins if I’m not county chairman is Kevin Hall. Because I’m nullified, and that puts the state party chairmanship in his hands,” Beltram said. “...This is all about Kevin Hall trying to cut me off at the knees.”

(Just a reminder, Beltram has said that if he wins both races, he’ll pick a day about 90 days out to abdicated the county throne so candidates for that seat can mount a campaign.)

Local activist and political consultant Kerry Wood agreed that the anti-Beltram sentiment is causing some people to get involved. Variouos factions are aligning with a single purpose.

But, he said, Hall is sending out materials to people on the precinct level across the state, as anyone in that race should be doing.

“Kevin knows what we’re already doing here, so he doesn’t have to do anything,” Wood said.

Wood added that once Floyd announced she was running, it was clear that the best way oust Beltram was to not cause like-minded activists to choose between her and Hall. There are individuals pushing for one or the other, but the overall effort to remove Beltram from his county seat is one that is hands-off in the state race. For now.

“I’m sure, after the county race is over with, the camps will divide, But we’re all on the same page in this round,” he said.

As for Hall’s master plan, Hall said today, “Rick gives me way too much credit. There are executive committee and chairman’s races in counties all over the state. And I wouldn’t get into the middle of them if my life depended on it. Spartanburg County’s not the only county with open races. It’s common across the state.”

So, on the county level, there are currently two forces for the activists to coalesce around: Beltram and Ryggs.

Beltram has been trying to force a debate with Ryggs since she announced late last week. He’s been blasting e-mails left and right, calling a meeting Tuesday night (March 31).

Ryggs said her schedule won’t allow her to make either of the times Beltram has proposed for a debate that night -- she has a speaking engagement at 7 p.m. -- and said she isn’t entirely comfortable with a participant in a debate being one of the organizers. And, Beltram, following state party rules, wanted to open that night up for any last-minute delegates to sign up for the upcoming convention(s). Ryggs, citing the state code of laws, said that he can’t do that. (The party rules and the code of laws differ. Sounds like an easy housecleaning measure for the Legislature or state party to take up, but neither is likely to do so in time to have an impact here.)

Ryggs said she is willing to debate Beltram, but added, “Rick has been with the county party for 15 years or more. I have been with the county party for 10 years... Most of the people in the county party know us, They know our record, They know our work. We really don’t need a debate. This is a referendum on Rick Beltram.”

She's also questioned whether calling all of the activists out again -- after two relatively large gatherings recently, and the county convention on the horizon -- is asking too much of them. She said she's looking forward to meeting and speaking with them one-on-one or in small groups.

After several phone calls today, it appears the Beltram and Ryggs may have a chance to speak in a forum-like setting at some point next week -- perhaps, even Tuesday night -- but nothing has been confirmed enough for me to announce it here. Ryggs said she's more comfortable when a third party organizes such an event.

Beltram is going forward with a legal notice for his meeting Tuesday, he said. He’s removed the delegate sign-up section of the meeting, but says he will go forward with a debate between candidates for state committeeman (that’s the person who represents the county on the state GOP executive committee -- there are at least two candidates I know of), and go over details for the April convention. He says there also will be a discussion on inclusion and exclusion.

“The meeting will go on,” he said. “This debate has to be in front of delegates to the county convention. Otherwise, it’s a sham.”

He added: “We have a lot of new people in the party. A lot of people don’t know what the chairman does. I don’t think our records have been discussed at all in public. And we need to be able to be asked questions by people in the room. The delegates to the county convention need to have the opportunity to have a real debate prior to the convention so a simple two- or three-minute speech at the convention isn’t going to sway anyone’s vote. Rick Beltram is not afraid of his record, and Rick Beltram believes a debate is the only fair thing for the Spartanburg County Republican Party.”

I asked Beltram if he thought his approach to having a debate could be seen as bullying his opponent. (It seemed a legitimate question considering he attached personal e-mails between himself and Ryggs to next week’s meeting announcement.)

“I hope it’s being seen as I remember the open hostility toward Lindsey Graham when he wouldn’t debate Buddy Witherspoon.” Beltram said. “And the same people who were pretty much on Buddy Witherspoon team are pretty much against me. So, it’s interesting in one case an incumbent like Lindsey Graham won’t debate a challenger, but to think for a challenger to ignore a debate with the incumbent is inappropriate or is bullying? No. I would think she would applaud my efforts to be out there and spend time debating a challenger.”

Asked about his support for Ryggs, Wood said, “I know her to be conservative and I know her to be honest. LaDonna doesn’t have it in herself to manipulate anyone.”

I should point out that not everyone is part of one faction or another. I talked with activists last night who are supporting Beltram for the county spot but Floyd for state chair, for instance. There are those supporting Ryggs’ county bid and are indifferent to whether that hurts Beltram’s state chances. There are people publicly supporting candidates who say privately they will vote differently.

Ryggs, in a phone interview today, said, "I've been publicly neutral in the state race... and I intend to stay that way. If elected chair, I believe you have to stay that way. I don’t know that us taking Rick out helps Kevin. I don’t know that it helps Karen. I don’t know that it makes a difference. This is about us giving our county party back to the people."

I had a long conversation with Ryggs, and between that and the notes I’m still wading through from the state GOP chairman candidate’s forum, there’s tons more to say. There’s a lot the candidates have to say about issues, about the party platform, about the way the party organizations are run. But as Wood’s comment above indicates, these candidates’ personal qualities, characteristics, methods and personalities seem like they’ll be just as much of a factor as delegates cement their support.

I’ll try to get into this further later this week.

Edit: Title change and some minor additions at 8:39 p.m.

This turned out to be a fun question Monday. I thought it was necessary because supporters of former presidential candidate Ron Paul plan to turn out en masse to impact county and, if Spartanburg is any indication, state Republican Party leadership. Also, Howard Rich has been the subject of numerous stories (here's one), given the amount of money he's able to spend promoting his definition of school choice.

Q: I'm going to name two names. Tell me how they may have helped or hurt the S.C. Republican Party: Ron Paul and Howie Rich.

Spartanburg businesswoman Karen Floyd: "Both actually broaden the texture of our fabric for the state of South Carolina. Take Ron Paul first. The man is absolutely maverick. If you watched his campaign, some of the principles he stood by,  the way he articled them... The way he mobilized the tea party, his fundraising was innovative. It was everything we talk about as Republicans that we need to do. And I honor them. Howie Rich is a philanthropist out of New York City that has an absolute belief in school choice. He found the state of South Carolina a place to infuse his capital, a place to put his money where he thought was important. And again, I honor that. That's what democracy is. And if anyone says otherwise, then we'll limit ourselves as a party and as a people. I say the more the merrier. It enriches us all."

Columbia attorney Kevin Hall: "Ron Paul is a tremendous conservative voice. I disagree on issues from time to time. But to have a voice to speak to the constitutional strength of our country, and to the truth of the Constitution, made the debate of our presidential candidates who ultimately were contending for the nomination better. As I said before, primaries are good. A range of views is good. Ron Paul made the debate better. I'll remind you of Steve Forbes when he ran. None of us thought Steve Forbes was going to win. Steve Forbes knew he wasn't going to win. But he made everybody better, because he forced rational discourse on economic  issues. When he left the scene, our party wasn't so good on economics anymore, so he did help us. With regard to Howie Rich, I feel very similar to Karen on this. We have a process people have to disclose their contributions in this context. And people can draw their conclusions from that. He obviously is a pro-school choice champion. Much as Karen said, the more the merrier. The greatest, broadest debate – all out in the sunlight – is good for our party."

Spartanburg County GOP Chairman Rick Beltram: "In May 2007, we had a debate in Columbia, and Ron Paul made some pretty strong comments about 'blowback' as it referred to President Bush. And whether it's President Bush or President Obama now, I have the ultimate respect for whoever is president. This year, we took a bus load of people to the inauguration. Did I vote for Obama? No. Did I want him there? No. But folks, he is our president. So, I took offense at Ron Paul's comments. Jason took these notes and didn't publish the story until July 4, 2007. Within moments, my cell phone, my e-mail lit up from Ron Paul people literally all over the world fussing at me for what I was doing. And I said, 'Well, here's what I heard, here's what everybody else heard. But I'll back up and give Dr. Paul an opportunity to come to Spartanburg and talk to our GOP group' And we made a little money on the deal. We had a nice luncheon over at the Summit Pointe. At the end of the afternoon, I asked the Ron Paul campaign people, Tell me how many times Dr. Paul has spoken before a GOP organization, whether it's county, state or municipal. You know what the answer was? We're the first one. When Ron Paul came back in December 2007, I asked the same question. How many have you spoken to? Two. Spartanburg and Spartanburg. So, my record shows, even though I might not agree with somebody, he was running as a Republican, and we did give him the courtesy of being here. As far as Howard Rich, again, if somebody wants to put money into campaigns here, that's certainly their choice. I want it disclosed. I want full transparency of money coming in and going out. But also folks, how long has it been that lobbyists, trial attorneys, large attorney groups have been pumping money into not only Democrat campaigns, but some of the Republican campaigns. So only this time does Howard Rich get push back because the trial attorneys aren't the only ones giving big money. So, again, bring the money in, but I want it fully disclosed coming in and going out."

Full disclosure: The comments Beltram referred to, if I recall correctly, were from an interview I did over the phone with him as he was leaving the May debate. The unused portion of those notes sat in my stack of things to get to. Coming up on July 4, that seemed like a fun time to talk about liberty and politics and all that jazz. I had no idea it would blow up the way it did. As far as Beltram's comments about Spartanburg being the only organization to host Paul, though, I'm not entirely sure that's accurate. I'm sure there are plenty in the Ron Paul Army willing to correct him on that point, though, if it's untrue.

School choice was mentioned casually a few times Monday night, as it was here, but didn't take up a significant amount of time -- which, quite frankly, surprised me. I thought we were going to have to wrestle the candidtes away from the topic onto others.

Regarding this matter, though, all three candidates were asked if there was any language in the current S.C. GOP platform that they disagreed with. All said no.

The language regarding school choice:

"We support the concept of “school choice” and affirm the right of parents to home-school their children or send them to private or parochial schools of their choice. We embrace the healthy competition that will result from a comprehensive school choice plan that includes the private sector, and believe such a system should be instituted from kindergarten through 12th grade. In addition to improving public school performance, a system of school choice that includes tax credits, scholarship granting organizations and vouchers would offer more compassionate and better opportunities for all children in South Carolina."

One question I thought wouldn't get much of a response turned out to be quite interesting at this week's forum for the three S.C. GOP chairman candidates. It goes like this: The most vicious political battles in this state happen in Republican primaries. Should the state party discourage negative campaigning and, if so, to what extent should it get involved in primary races?

Columbia attorney Kevin Hall answered first: "It’s tough. The answer is yes. This goes back to Ronald Regean’s 11th commandment — Thou shalt not speak ill or evil of a fellow Republican. It’s important to distinguish between differences (in) ideas and opinions and policy where a vigorous and forceful debate and contrast are good, as opposed to personal attacks… Just the ugliness. We’ve got to put a lid on the ugliness, and promote the reasoned dialogue and difference. That is an important role, and why it is so essential that the party chair be neutral and not be connected to particular candidates. It’s our job to referee the process, help calm people down when they get hot, and help cool people down in the end to beat Democrats in November."

OK, so relatively mundane so far. The key item in his answer is the stress on neutrality for a party chairman, whether that's a shot at rivals Rick Beltram (current Spartanburg County GOP chairman) or Karen Floyd (heads the marketing firm The Palladian Group), well... that's for you to decide.

Beltram answered next: "When we think of negative attacks, they’re usually connected to a paycheck somewhere. Some consultant is getting big money to put out negative mail. I was working on Katon (Dawson)’s campaign for RNC chairman… The blistering he took from consultants in this state, hammering him up in D.C… He only lost what amounts to eight votes. So, folks, one of the things I’ve done is to try to source out consulting operations that can sell political tools at a very low, nominal number. Because until we reduce the money flow to some of these consultants, negative attacks go out, because there’s a reward to it with a paycheck. So the way we’re going to have to control it is to get less money to these consultants to reduce the negative attacking that comes out."

Now, there's a few elements here: One, the attack on consultants is obvious, and implies that one or both of his rivals are beholden to what he considers the instigators of campaign attacks. The other important thing is that Beltram, unprompted, brought up the whole controversy from April 2008 where he was criticized for offering consultant services to various state and local candidates. We wrote a few stories about it. Was this some sort of pre-emptive strike, an attempt to clear the air about something before he could be attacked on it? Possibly.

Floyd went last, with a very frank answer, which she prefaced by pointing out that she, too, supported Dawons's RNC bid "... and it was the consultants in South Carolina that probably put him over the edge, and it saddens me greatly… I’ve been on the receiving end of many negative attacks, whether when it was when I ran for County Council or state superintendent, and I can tell you negative attacks are a part of the political process. We can all sit up here and say we will engage and try to oversee a process, but the fact of the matter is negative politics actually does have impact on the results of campaigns. I’ve actually been through the gauntlet, and I can tell you candidly that I would push that we would have some type of decorum in the election process, but I just don’t believe that would happen.”

That's two of the three taking shots at South Carolina consultants. Makes you think their apparent shared desire to lead by example and bring transparency to their own race would see some movement, hmm?

A lot of insinuation and behind-the-back shots have been taken so far in the race for South Carolina Republican Party chairman. So-called confidential e-mails seem to end up all over the place. And while everyone might not be sure who they are for, many seem to know who they are against.

Most questions Monday night were general, but we did do one round where each candidate was asked to address a charge that had been levelled at them personally. Rather than get into back-and-forth matches with all the different personalities involved, I'll just present the q's and a's and let this be taken as the potential fodder it is.

First up, Spartanburg County GOP Chairman Rick Beltram, whose sound bite on The Conservativist blog has created some buzz. As transcribed on the submitted question, Beltram -- apparently reacting to Sen. Jim DeMint's endorsement of state party chairman rival Kevin Hall -- said, “When Jim DeMint comes by in 10, Karen’s not going to be county chairman, Kevin Hall is not going to be county chairman, Beltram will be county chairman and when he comes and wants to know what we can do for him, I am going to be on my hands.”

Beltram: "This is a 15 minute clip that somebody took, apparently on an iPhone, sitting in my office in a confidential meeting. If you listen to it carefully, it was clearly doctored and moved around and so forth. But here’s the truth of the matter — and I think Karen (Floyd) and I are in exactly the same spot — We think it’s inappropriate for Jim DeMint, for Lindsey Graham to jump into this race when they did. On Feb. 7 — Saturday, Feb. 7 — our esteemed state party Chairman, Katon Dawson made it very clear… Do not let the elected officials influence this race. Keep them out of it. Within 24 hours, both Senators Jim DeMint and Lindsey Graham bypassed what our state party chairman was asking for. And I’m going to tell you something. That does rub me wrong. And it should rub every activist in this state wrong that these folks are jumping into something before they even know the playing field. And then the backlash from that is apologies from their staff members saying he went off in his own direction. So, the point is my nerves are a little frayed. I think Jim DeMint let Karen and myself down. And yes, the communication is, that I’m not nearly as enthusiastic to helping Jim DeMint as I was if he had done the right thing and followed the instructions of our state party chairman to stay out of this race."

(As an aside, one question asked earlier in the evening to which all three candidates agreed: Which senator do you like more: Jim DeMint or Lindsey Graham? All three said DeMint. Two other points the three candidates agreed on: All are for registration by party in South Carolina, yet none of them would support recall elections to remove elected officials from office.)

Floyd, who runs the public relations and marketing firm The Palladian Group, was next. The tone of the question — again, this was submitted — was that her business's past and/or standing relationships with political candidates would influence her as state party chair. Beltram and Hall both made several references, for instance, to former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani. The Palladian Group handled Giuliani's South Carolina marketing effort during the 2008 presidential primary.

When asked whether her personal interests would influence her more public roll, Floyd responded: “When you go through one election, as I did for state superintendent, there are many, many lessons learned. The cadre of individuals that are now at the Palladian Group can sustain it. It is what I call a self-sustaining organization. Prior to that, I literally was doing all the rain-making. So, afterward, we had a huge buildup opportunity. And those of you that have ever been CEOs of organizations you have birthed, there are great lessons to be learned. The Palladian Group is self-sustaining, and I am absolutely excited about the prospect of doing S.C. GOP chair. You all also know I had founded the Palladian Group, and had worked with the Palladian Group simultaneously with serving as your chairman on (Spartanburg) County Council. And it was never made an issue. And I think the skill set required for each would be very similar.”

Hall, a Columbia attorney, was last in this round. The question stemmed from a past speech, from a comment that was taken (by some) to mean that the state party would be sending out paychecks to county party organizations. (Considering how contentious the Spartanburg County GOP chairman race -- in which Beltram is also running -- likely will get, this issue might surface again before or during the county convention.)

When asked to elaborate, Hall responded: “Here’s the point: Don’t misunderstand me. I’m not talking, as Rick would say, sending gobs of money back. I’m saying there are certain responsibilities when economic resources exist primarily at the state level. We were all at Clarendon County together. Clarendon County has maybe eight, 12, 15, 20 folks who show up for precinct reorganization — but 6,000 votes for the Republican presidential nominee. How do we help the people in Clarendon County get them active in the Republican Party? Do we say from Columbia, ‘Hey, figure it out yourself’ … Or do we say, ‘Look, let’s work with you in a collaborative way to figure out how to identify who those people are. To recruit them to a Facebook page. To recruit them electronically, so we can communicate by e-mail and otherwise.’ That, to me, is the sensible approach. It’s not mailing people checks. It’s not welfare. The point is to work together, and not to treat each of the 46 counties as an island, in complete isolation. Some counties would do well that way. Others would not.”

More to come. I haven't even gotten to the stuff about the liberal media yet :)

Edit (Thursday, 4:35 p.m.): Beltram e-mailed to say he misspoke about the "15-minute" clip. He meant to say "15-second" clip. It didn't raise any red flags to me because since he was talking about the sound bite being doctored, I figured he thought there was a longer audio recording and snippets were taken out. Still, the overall message of the statement holds, I believe.

Sorting through my notes from the forum Monday night between the three candidates for S.C. Republican Party chairman -- Spartanburg County GOP Chairman Rick Beltram, Spartanburg businesswoman Karen Floyd and Columbia attorney Kevin Hall -- one topic has already grabbed me.

It's this: Republicans across the board talk about the need for more transparency. So, the candidates were asked whether they would be willing -- in the spirit of transparency -- to disclose their financial contributions and expenditures now and up until the chairman's election. In essence, this is a lead-by-example question: Are you willing to do what the party wants elected officials and the government to do?

First up was Floyd. She said she would be in favor of disclosing financial information, but with three caveats: 1) That everyone does it, 2) That rules or protocols are in place so that everyone does it the same way, and 3) That there is a way to verify the legitimacy of the information disclosed (i.e. bank statements or other documents).

"We all talk about it (transparency), but the fact of the matter is it's hard to do," she said. "... Big picture, though, I would be in favor of it."

Hall followed, and echoed her sentiments. Hall pointed out that this was an issue the party was going to increasingly need to take a look at, as there are no rules in place now.

"If we’re going to do it, we’re going to have to have a filing process that is akin to what our elected officials do in the state," Hall said. "… It is not a knee-jerk type thing, where, frankly, folks want to demagogue on this issue in a variety of settings. We need to do it right if we’re going to do it."

Beltram answered third -- the questions rotated -- and said he had challenged his colleagues to this 10 days earlier but got no response.

"I do want transparency with no caveats except the three of us do it," he said, and sat down.

Checking with the state party, there are, in fact, no rules in place governing this -- and the only place to change that would be at the state convention, which would be too late for the purposes of this race.

However, since the three candidates all agree on the basic premise here, there's nothing to stop them from working out their own agreement. In fact, here goes a real opportunity to lead by example and take the initiative to work out that agreement.

Then, we can see who is supporting who financially, who has what business interests that may or may not be important to this race -- perhaps putting an end to some of the speculation out there in the blogosphere -- and, like any good leader, it shows the troops that their general is willing to do anything he or she asks of them.

To me, this question made the need to ask about each candidate's alleged ties to a different 2010 gubernatorial candidate moot. If we see who is vested in who now, then there shouldn't be (as many) surprises down the road.

What do you think? Let me know. Better yet, let them.

Click here to see a list of comics shipping this week, courtesy of The Tangled Web.

"Azrael: Death's Dark Knight" No. 1 ships this week, and perhaps it will be an early indicator as to whether I did the right thing by reserving copies of all of the Battle for the Cowl stuff running through the Bat-books.

Personally, I'm looking forward to "G.I.Joe: Cobra."

I'll be co-moderating a forum -- along with WORD radio personality Bob McLain -- between the three state GOP chairman candidates Monday, March 16, at the Marriott at Renaissance park. Spartanburg County GOP Chairman Rick Beltram, Spartanburg businesswoman Karen Floyd and Columbia attorney Kevin Hall have said they will be there, according to organizers.

The event starts at 6:30 p.m. and the program begins at 7. It's expected to last an hour, with some brief opening and closing statements and the lion's share of the time devoted to questions and answers.

I'll be coming straight from a County Council meeting, laptop in hand, and may try to Twitter some during the forum. If it looks to be too much trouble early on, I'll drop that. If it works out, then feel free to contribute to the conversation in real time. There may be one or two other twitterers in the crowd :)

Most of the questions I've scribbled down so far fall into one of two categories: party philosophy and strategy. But I think personal positions on certain issues seem important, too. While the chairman would be the public face of the S.C. Republican Party, that person's views on certain issues -- and how they line up with the party's platform -- seems important. But I'm just a reporter. I'd want to hold Democrats to a similar standard if this was their chairman race (and they had two Spartanburg County people in the mix).

So, if anyone wants to suggest questions, feel free to post them here. All questions will be taken into consideration.

Thanks. It will be an interesting week.

Despite a snow-covered Spartanburg and the dangers of black ice on the road, the Spartanburg County Republican Party, at first glance, seems to have done well with its biennial precinct reorganization.

The blandly named “precinct reorganization” isn’t exclusive to party activists – Democrats and Republicans alternate the years they do it – but it is the front door to any registered voter who wants to have a say in county or state party leadership and/or present resolutions that could affect their state party’s platform.

Monday morning, when I was making calls about things I cover, trying to determine what was cancelled and what wasn’t, I was told that reorganization – advertised on the radio for the past week – would go on. Organization is largely a formal process, but a necessary one, to elect precinct officers and file the appropriate paperwork to become a county and/or state delegate – i.e. to have a vote at the county or state conventions, which are in April and May, respectively.

Because of the weather, I was told a makeup meeting was planned for 7 p.m. Monday, March 23, at the Country Hearth Inn for all 92 precincts. I posted that on Twitter and TalkUpstate.

In the end, though, county Republican Party Chairman Rick Beltram says 78 of 92 precincts have been organized so far. Not bad, considering two years ago, on the verge of a contentious presidential primary, the county GOP organized 88 precincts after the makeup meeting.

But here’s the kicker: At least some of the precincts were organized by people for the main purpose of unseating Beltram.  I could see a lengthy and likely uninteresting debate about party rules grow out of this, but that’s the initial impression. The comparison to this county's two legislative delegations already has been made.

When asked, activist Gary Coats agreed that Monday night was a glimpse of a larger effort to make someone else Spartanburg County GOP chairman. When asked if he would be a candidate challenging Beltram, he would neither confirm nor deny his interest in the seat.

Coats is an up-and-comer in local Republican politics. He’s one of the Ron Paul activists who first got involved during the presidential primary – except he’s stayed particularly active. He’s been involved in party politics, volunteered to run Rep. Steve Parker’s Statehouse campaign, and I think he goes to every “Let’s Talk” that U.S. Rep. Bob Inglis has (though not necessarily because he agrees with Inglis). He seemed to be getting closer and closer to the county GOP inner circle until he recently severed that relationship on his blog, The Conservativist.

Beltram has been county party chairman since 1999. He’s faced serious opposition for his seat a few times, perhaps most notably from Spartanburg businesswoman Karen Floyd. Beltram is seeking re-election to his county post, but is also running against Floyd for state GOP chairman (along with Columbia attorney Kevin Hall). Beltram has said that if he’s successful on both fronts, he’ll announce a date about 90 days out after assuming state chairmanship that he will give up his county position. The extra time is for county chairman candidates to mount a campaign and have a chance to debate, he said.

Coats – currently the chairman of the Spartanburg Young Republicans – has called the county re-election a referendum on Beltram’s leadership. Beltram has said the impact of the county party race depends on how it plays out.

The anti-Beltram crowd was skeptical of the makeup meeting for reorganization, thinking it was a way to discourage them from showing up Monday night.

(I should point out that I don’t know whether Beltram will face one or more than one challenger for county chair.)

Beltram has already said that some precinct organizers had photocopies of the necessary paperwork rather than the originals issued by the party. I mention this because it seems to be an indicator of some of the hair-splitting going into the minutiae of party rules that could erupt.

Another red flag: There’s been an indication that Parker and activist Paul Jansen (another Ron Paul-ler, though one who breaks with the congressman on certain issues) had words at the reorganization meeting for Boiling Springs B, which has polls at Oakland Elementary School. The school was closed due to the weather, so Jansen instituted a move to a nearby grocery store to fill out the paperwork.

Parker, the sitting precinct president of Boiling Springs B, showed up and said he didn’t want to organize Monday night because he didn’t want to leave out people who couldn’t make it. Jansen said he didn’t realize this, but was OK with it. Parker says the two had a “cordial and congenial” conversation. Jansen said they had a “spirited and frank exchange of views” on a variety of issues, particularly school choice and the federal stimulus package.

Beltram said several precincts opted to have their meetings at alternate locations because the weather forced closings. Some moved to restaurants, for instance. He said, “Despite the weather, there was still a lot of people – new people.” Officially, he attributed the turnout to the $3,000 the Spartanburg and Greenville County Republican parties have spent on radio advertisements.

But as the night played out, Beltram agreed there was an organized effort to unseat him.

“I’ve known that for a while. And tonight we got to see that,” he said Monday. He added that he wasn’t worried about facing opposition for his county seat.

There’s more, but we’re already way into the realm of inside baseball. My question is, how much do you, the reader, care about this? If you want us to continue to devote time to following this, let me know by posting here or e-mailing jason.spencer@shj.com.

Either way, the game’s afoot.

Edit 2:42 p.m. - Beltram just called to clarify a point he made last night (when I was writing this). He now says that 78 of 92 precincts were "supposed" to organize last night. Paperwork is still coming in. So far, he has received documents from 33 precincts. I asked if he was accepting the photocopied packets, as opposed to the county party-issued originals, and he said, "Yes."