Some of the complaints and ill-will over Diane Tebelius's leadership of the state GOP stem from her involvement in the election contest lawsuit and the aftermath. The questions that I posted about this here are just those -- questions -- suggested to me by others. They may reflect, in some cases, inaccurate perceptions amplified by two years of rumors. Although Tebelius didn't respond with her side of the story, others with first-hand knowledge have contacted me and their recollections are quite consistent with each other --
Go back to December 2004/January 2005. Dino Rossi had lost the third recount. Chris Vance was party chairman. Diane Tebelius was National Committeewoman and had been a legal observer for the vote count from election day through the recounts. In December the executive board authorized the party to spend money for the contest. Tebelius assembled the legal team. In January the party hired Davis, Wright Tremaine and Dale Foreman. Tebelius continued to do some legal work (characterized as "minor tasks") on the contest after the team was assembled. Her role was uniformly described as meddlesome, not particularly productive, and that she alienated the main legal team. But the party kept her in the loop because she was the National Committeewoman. There was no written agreement for this work and Vance was under the impression that she was working as an unpaid volunteer, as several other lawyers were doing. It was an infuriating surprise when she handed the party a $100,000+ invoice in February. Beyond the surprise, the amount was viewed as unreasonably high for the services performed. Vance was advised to pay the bill, as Tebelius had been performing services at the party's direction, even though there was no written agreement in place. But he also made clear that he would not pay her for any additional work. She continued to volunteer her time, took some depositions and did some research, but also, as someone put it "inserted herself into meetings and conference calls that she made take twice as long as they otherwise would have". She was the National Committeewoman, and nobody wanted to be the one to disinvite her. It was said to be a relief to everyone involved that she went to Europe on vacation and was not present during the trial itself.
[It had been suggested in the posted questions that Vance paid the bill to buy her off and prevent her from running against him for state party chair. But the timing does not support that theory. Tebelius did briefly mount a campaign prior to the ratification meeting in January, but Rossi expressed strong support in Vance and talked her out of challenging the leadership while the lawsuit was getting underway. The invoice for legal services was not presented and paid until February. ]
The party was still retiring the debts from the contest lawsuit months after Tebelius became chairman in 2006. But as Eric noted earlier, Tebelius raised very little of the money herself. Most of the money to pay off the debt was raised by others, and in some cases taken from federal "hard dollars" which should have been used only for campaign and get-out-the-vote activities. But that story deserves a separate post.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at January 24, 2007 06:40 PM | Email ThisThey didn't spell her name right on the PDC disclosure form....
Why was she paid so much for doing her job? Wasn't she compensated for being National Chairwoman? If so she shouldn't have gotten any extra compensation for extra work without a contract.
Based upon what I've read on SP, especially her refusal to answer Eric's questions, and cancelling her meeting with you (without a good explanation that I've read about here) I'd say that she should go.
Posted by: Obi-Wan on January 24, 2007 07:14 PMI think it's also telling that she cancelled the meeting with the SP crew. Did she ever intend to keep that meeting? Who knows. IMHO, the more light and scrutiny that is applied to this situation, the better. Keep up with the reporting on this issue Stefan, et al!
Posted by: Patrick on January 24, 2007 07:42 PMWhere is the leadership? The Republican party in this state needs a HUGE shakeup.
Posted by: Shaun on January 24, 2007 08:31 PM Because her opponent Freddie Simpson would
have been even worse.Very few individuals
wanted to run at the time do to the mess
Chris Vance left behind.So those two were
what we were stuck with.
Since you don't know me at all you
shouldn't make statements like that.
If what I say bothers you so much then
don't read it.
As far as Washington state Gop politics are
concerned give me an example of what you
consider to be a positive right now? Other then
that were out of debt. What else is there to
be happy about.
As for positive and Republican party in WA, how about we have 3 great Members of Congress (Tebelius didn't managed to tank them), a good man as Attorney General, and I hope a tremendous candidate for Governor in 2008, Dino Rossi. I'm also hopeful that we will get new leadership for the state party -- we sorely need it.
And how is this for a constructive suggestion, why doesn't the state party double-up and pay Tebelius another $100,000 if she will go away. She got the first $100,000 for doing nothing, and the second $100,000 would be to stop running the party into the ground. A bargain!
And as for being out of debt, I'd say take off the rose colored glasses, Eeyore. Eric Earling has already laid out what a disaster the finances are.
Posted by: Whiskey Dick on January 25, 2007 10:47 AMAs for positive and Republican party in WA, how about we have 3 great Members of Congress (Tebelius didn't managed to tank them), a good man as Attorney General, and I hope a tremendous candidate for Governor in 2008, Dino Rossi. I'm also hopeful that we will get new leadership for the state party -- we sorely need it.
And how is this for a constructive suggestion, why doesn't the state party double-up and pay Tebelius another $100,000 if she will go away. She got the first $100,000 for doing nothing, and the second $100,000 would be to stop running the party into the ground. A bargain!
And as for being out of debt, I'd say take off the rose colored glasses, Eeyore. Eric Earling has already laid out what a disaster the finances are.
Posted by: Whiskey Dick on January 25, 2007 10:51 AMAnd can we take up a collection to get Phil a remedial grammar and punctuation course?
Posted by: Beavis on January 25, 2007 11:04 AMPhil Bevis
Posted by: ReaganROCKS!!! on January 25, 2007 11:44 AMThe fact that there is not a word of support from anyone on the state committee, not even from Diane herself, is telling. The more light that is given to the whole race, the better.
Before Vance's last re-election to state chairman, I was listening to a conservative talk show that had the topic of state chairman on. A caller said it best, why does the state committee always elect someone to state chairman who just lost a race for public office? State committee members, ask yourself that question before you elect either of the two running. Are you going to continue the same pattern you've been on? Wake up!
Is there anyone else that has a proven record of success in running perhaps a county party that you might be able to draft into this position? I'll bet if he was a snake he'd bite ya! Perhaps that's why you haven't given him much thought.
Posted by: Michelle on January 25, 2007 12:31 PMThose who want to control the money in Republican elections fear an independent minded chair. Those smoke filled room types want to run the show for themselves with complete disregard to the best interest of the Republican Party. It is too complicated (and unpredictable) for them to work within the party to help Republicans. They are just looking out for themselves.
At least acknowledge what is going on - it's about the $$MONEY$$ - and with Tebilius re-elected Chair, the STOGIE GANG will have to sit at the table (with the all of Republican Party) to serve the best interests of Republicans of Washington State and that is what scares them the most.
The STOGIE GANG is just a few, self-interested hacks. I want the Republican Party to represent me and all the Republicans in my neighborhood, and my city, county, and state.
That's right Ed they won't elect someone
who's not running.However you don't know if Mark
Hulst is running or not. It's as simple as
that.
State committee members and county chairs...you DO have another choice...are you listening? Heed the call...Save your party...Draft and elect Mark Hulst State Chair.
Posted by: TamaNekoChan on January 26, 2007 12:30 AM All I will say is what your suggesting may
just happen. So hold on it might get pretty
interesting Saturday.