: FOLEY

FOLEY
& LARDNER

ATTORNEYS AT LAW WASHINGTON HARBOUR 3000 K STREET, N.W. SUITE 600 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20007·5109 202.672.5300 TEL 202.672.5399 FAX

LLP

foley.com

March 2,2012
VIA HAND DELIVERY

WRITER'S DIRECT LINE 202.295.4081 cmitcheli@foley.com EMAIL CLIENT/MATTER NUMBER 072573·0101

The Honorable Reince Priebus Chairman Republican National Committee 310 First Street, SE Washington, DC 20003 Re: Request for Investigation of Michigan Republican Party Allocation of Delegate(s)

Dear Chairman Priebus: Please accept this letter as a formal request on behalf of Rick Santorum for President for an investigation by the Republican National Committee's (RNC) General Counsel into the reversal of delegate allocation rules by the Michigan Republican Party following the 2012 Michigan Republican Presidential Primary held on February 28,2012. We request an investigation into the Michigan Republican State Committee and any individual, campaign, or entity involved in the reallocation decision(s). After reviewing the rules set forth by the Michigan Republican Party and the results of the February 28,2012 primary, it was clear that the state's at-large delegates would be proportionally divided between Senator Santorum and Governor Romney - each receiving one at-large delegate as a result of the February 28,2012 primary contest. The sequence of rulemaking dictating the allocation of delegates is as follows: 1. On August 13,2011, the Michigan Republican State Committee (MRS C) overwhelmingly passed a comprehensive set of Rules governing the method to be used for the Presidential Nominating Process. This vote was the result of a lengthy process that began in a specially formed task force that was designed to take statewide input from Republicans, and make a recommendation to the Policy Committee. The Policy Committee is the standing sub-committee of the MRSC in which almost all Convention, By-Laws, and other Rule-related matters begin, before they are addressed by the full MRSC. The Policy Committee worked to draft final recommendations for the full MRSC during the summer of2011, making its final presentation in August.

BOSTON BRUSSELS CHICAGO DETROIT

JACKSONVILLE LOS ANGELES MADISON MIAMI

MILWAUKEE NEW YORK ORLANDO SACRAMENTO

SAN DIEGO SAN DIEGO/DEL MAR SAN FRANCISCO SHANGHAI

SILICON VALLEY TALLAHASSEE TAMPA TOKYO WASHINGTON, D.C.

4822-0359-6558.1

: FOLEY
FOLEY & LARDNER LLP

The Honorable Reince Priebus March 2, 2012 Page 2 2. The method of election that was adopted on August 13, 2011 was a State of Michigan administered Primary. In these Rules, the MRSC also addressed a number of other issues, including how the Delegates would be awarded. 3. Rule 19 covers matters related to the Election and Allocation of National Convention Delegates. Specifically, Rule 19 C. (2) contemplates a Threshold Vote of 15%, and Proportional Allocation of the at-Large Delegate positions. The calculation as specified in 19 C. (2) dictates that the raw vote totals of the candidates who meet the Threshold Vote of 15% of the Statewide Presidential Preference Primary be calculated as a percentage to determine the proportional allocation of the at-Large Delegates. When this calculation results in a fractional number, it is rounded up or down to the nearest whole number, with .5 or higher being rounded up, and .5 or lower being rounded down. 4. In a Memorandum dated February 7 to the RNC, which was sent by Michigan Republican Chairman Bobby Schostak to all members of the MRSC on February 22,2012 ("the Memorandum"), the Credentials Committee provided further clarification related to the appropriate calculations in the event the penalty contemplated by the RNC was applied. This Memorandum as presented was consistent with all public discussions held by the MRSC during its previous general sessions and debate on these topics, and was consistent with the historical application of the proportionality of Delegate apportionment. 5. The Memorandum makes clear three important points: • At the bottom of page 2, and top of page 3, it denotes that no amendments are being made to the August 13,2011 Rules, and that the Republican National Committee has therefore determined no waiver is needed in accepting the Memorandum from the Committee. (An actual amendment submitted in February of2012, well past the deadlines established in the RNC Rules, would have necessitated a waiver from the RNC.) In keeping with the principle that no amendments are being made, the Memorandum further details at the top of page 3 that "Michigan will adhere to Rule 19 of the State Rules as closely as possible." Further keeping with the already established fact that the Memorandum is not an amendment to the Rules, the Memorandum clarifies that the method of apportioning at-Large "officially recognized Delegates" will be the same as if there were not any Delegates who are not "officially recognized". This is accomplished by merely substituting "two" for "fourteen" in Rule 19. The language from 19 C. (2) regarding at-Large Delegates is as follows:

"With respect to at-large delegates and alternates, please note that absent a penalty from the Republican National Committee, Michigan is entitled to fourteen(14) at-large delegates and alternates. According to Rule No. 19C(2). of the State Rules, at-large delegates and alternates are
4822-0359-6558.1

: FOLEY
FOLEY & LARDNER LLP

The Honorable Reince Priebus March 2, 2012 Page 3 allocated on a proportional basis of the statewide vote, to presidential candidates receiving at least fifteen percent (15%) of the statewide vote. This process of allocation will remain unchanged. Now, however, an at-large slate of two (2) National Convention delegates and alternates will also be selected to complete the "officially recognized" listing of 30 National Convention delegates and alternates from Michigan. The allocation of this "officially recognized" at-large slate of two (2) National Convention delegates and alternates shall be calculated in accordance with Rule No. J9C(2). of the State Rules by merely substituting "two (2)" for ''fourteen (14). " 6. The Credentials Committee did not meet again between February 4 and Primary Election Day on February 28, 2012. 7. The State Party Chair communicated the Memorandum to the full MRSC and other interested parties in an email titled "Memos to RNC", dated February 22,2012. 8. No other written communication to the respective campaigns, MRSC members, or the RNC exists which would contradict or adjust the above language in any way. 9. Therefore, using Rule 19 C. (2), the calculation for at-Large "authorized" Delegates is as follows: 10. "Officially Recognized" Delegates, substituted for the original 14: 52.0533% of the raw votes of the two candidates who met the Threshold, or 1.0411, for Romney 47.9467% of the raw votes of the two candidates who met the Threshold, or .9589 for Santorum Again, using the .5 Rounding calculation in the Rule 19 C (2) as required for fractional Delegates (more than .5 of a Delegate rounds up, less than .5 of a Delegate rounds down), the allocation is: 1 Romney "Officially Recognized" Delegate 1 Santorum "Officially Recognized" Delegate We are deeply concerned that the State Party would choose to make a decision contrary to the noted delegate allocation rules, as set forth in the Memorandum and other governing documents. Further compelling this request and reinforcing the veracity of our campaign's concerns regarding the integrity of the process are the words of Romney supporter and former Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox, who was in the minority of the allocation decision vote to award Governor Romney both at-large delegates: "I have this crazy idea that you follow the rules. I'd love to give the at-large delegates to Mitt Romney, but our rules provide for strict apportionment. " Our campaign believes it is important to ask several questions regarding the decision-making process of the Michigan Republican Party / MRSC:

4822-0359-6558.1

: FOLEY
FOLEY & LARDNER LLP

The Honorable Reince Priebus March 2, 2012 Page 4 1) Why were the rules changed after the election took place? 2) How could there be confusion on the rules allocating delegates within the committee itself? 3) Was there any notice of the meeting at which this change in the rules occurred and was it open to the public -- or did it take place behind closed doors with no notice? 4) Are there public minutes detailing the deliberations that occurred, resulting in the abrupt change in the rules? 5) Were public supporters of any candidate present, invited to participate in the process, whether as presenters, voting or otherwise? If so, which candidates' representatives or supporters were in attendance? 6) What is the legal justification for the change in the allocation of delegate(s)? These important questions prompt our campaign to ask that this matter be referred to the RNC General Counsel's office for an immediate review and formal investigation to ascertain the integrity of the decision-making process, the application of the rules as adopted, and to ensure that the rules, as adopted, were followed and that neither the state party nor another campaign had a role in inappropriately changing the established rules regarding delegate allocation. Specifically with reference to question #5, it is our understanding that several public supporters and Michigan surrogates of an opposing campaign voted in favor of the delegate allocation change which assisted their chosen candidate. This request is not about the allocation of a single delegate; it is about ensuring a transparent electoral process, avoiding unscrupulous tactics and backroom deals by establishment figures and campaigns who may have not received the result they hoped for at the ballot box. Elections are about the voters expressing their will, not a group in a backroom deciding how delegates should be awarded in a manner that is contrary to the rules adopted before the election. The rules were publicly stated, publicly accepted, and our campaign played by those rules. To change the rules after the fact is something we would not expect to be condoned within our Party, which has a long history of fighting for freedom and integrity at the ballot box. And to condone such behavior by any entity - whether it be a State or Local Party or a campaign for the highest office in our nation - is a black-eye to the leadership of our Party. Please contact me at (202) 295-4081 should you have any questions regarding this letter or the facts referenced herein. We look forward to your reply. Thank you for your prompt attention to this serious matter.

4822-0359-6558.1

: FOLEY
FOLEY & LARDNER LLP

The Honorable Reince Priebus March 2,2012 Page 5 Sincerely,

Cleta Mitchell, Esq., Counsel Rick Santorum for President

cc:

Mr. Ms. Mr. Mr. Ms.

John R. Phillippe, Jr., RNC Chief Counsel Sharon Day, Republican National Committee Co-Chair Bobby Schostak, Michigan Republican Party Chairman Saul Anuzis, Michigan Republican National Committeeman Holly June Hughes, Michigan Republican National Committeewoman

4822-0359-6558.1

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful