The governing body for the Republican Party of Virginia — the State Central Committee — faced backlash over the weekend after misinformation spread across social media about actions taken during a meeting on Saturday.
“Today the majority of State Central Committee, which essentially acts as the elected board of directors for the Republican Party of Virginia, voted to remain neutral and abstain from taking a position on the 3 horrendous amendments that will be on your ballot this November,” wrote Del. Karen Hamilton, R-Culpeper, on social media Saturday night. “You may have varying opinions on these but the official party creed would demand a NO vote on all three. The republican caucus in the General Assembly voted almost unanimously against them all.”
Hamilton is referencing the three constitutional amendments, repealing the defunct same-sex marriage ban, enshrining abortion access, and the automatic restoration of voting rights, that will be on the ballot this November for voters to either approve or deny.
Hamilton walked back her comments a bit the next day.
“In regards to my comments yesterday, I am told that the SCC will meet again in June and the topic of the amendments may come back up for discussion,” she wrote. I would encourage you to reach out to the SCC Representatives in your congressional district to express your opinion and ask for there to be a recorded vote at the next meeting. They are elected officials who represent the republicans from local committees on the state board.”
In an email sent out to all SCC members by Republican Party of Virginia Chair Jeff Ryer, he explained the situation further.
SCC members received notification Friday night that a member would be introducing a motion on Saturday for the committee to vote to oppose all three amendments, according to Ryer.
Before that vote was taken, another member of the committee moved to refer the issue to the Resolutions Committee, with specific instructions to seek input from RPV unit chairs and to prepare a report.
“I move to refer the main and substitute motions to the SCC Resolutions Committee with a mandate to consult with local units and report back for the August meeting,” the motion read.
“By a standing vote of 32 to 30, Cliff Dunn’s motion to refer was approved,” Ryer wrote in the email. The original motion was not defeated, Ryer said,
”but were instead referred to a subcommittee for review, consideration, and, ultimately, recommendation(s). This is not the equivalent of taking no action regarding the Party’s stance on these proposed amendments.”
While the final motion stated that the SCC will take this matter back up before the full committee in August, Ryer indicated that it could happen much sooner — as soon as June 13.
“Resolutions Committee Chairman and 2nd District Representative Elizabeth Lankford already expressed to the members at yesterday’s meeting her commitment to act expeditiously in fulfilling the SCC’s mandate given at yesterday’s meeting,” Ryer wrote in the email. “I can now report that, in all likelihood, this matter will be back before us very, very soon.”
David Botkins, the First Congressional District representative on SCC, said the committee action is proceeding as it would in the General Assembly, while also noting that many proxy votes were cast on Saturday.
“There is no doubt everyone in the room Saturday opposes the radical constitutional amendments” he said. “However, we had a record number of proxy attendees, and the Resolutions Committee was bypassed in this instance. We have a committee system just like the General Assembly for a reason.”
Botkins, who voted in support of referring the question to the committee, said he opposes all three amendments.