Elections Are the Bedrock of Representative Democracy
How can someone who professes to defend “election integrity” and vows to “put Tennessee voters back in charge” support eliminating primary elections? Selecting party nominees by caucus (i.e., insider cliques) would be a travesty.
Thanks to the Tennessee Star (here) and Williamson Wrong (here)! Gary Humble responded here and here.
In his bid for a re-match against Senate Majority Leader Jack Johnson to be the Republican nominee for Senate District 27, candidate Gary Humble vows to “put Tennessee voters back in charge.” This is ironic, for two reasons. First, his platform includes a pledge to seek “term limits for our General Assembly.” We already have term limits; they are called “elections,” and the voters can send a legislator home at the end of his term by voting for a different candidate (as Humble hopes will happen to Sen. Jack Johnson in 2026). Term limits would keep popular legislators with proven track records from continuing to serve in Congress or the General Assembly. Preventing voters from re-electing someone they trust is hardly putting them “back in charge.”
Second, and more importantly, Humble opposed a bill passed by the General Assembly this year that required statewide political parties to choose their nominees for partisan offices in primary elections as opposed to “caucuses” conducted by county parties. Existing Tennessee law allowed statewide political parties in a county to use caucuses to select nominees for partisan local offices, but not for governor, the general assembly, or Congress. SB 799 changed this to require primary elections to select the nominees for all partisan offices. Humble hysterically called the law (HB 855/SB 799) “an affront to liberty and the fundamentals of constitutional order.” This is nonsense. There are big differences between primary elections and caucuses, and supporting the latter definitely does not “put Tennessee voters back in charge.” Let’s start with the obvious differences. Primary elections are conducted in accordance with state law, at multiple polling places, and during an extended “early voting” period in addition to election day. Any registered voter possessing a valid ID can participate.
Those unable to vote in person—military personnel stationed overseas, the elderly or infirm, business travelers, students living away from home, etc.—can cast an absentee ballot by mail. The vote count in a primary election is performed by bipartisan county election commissions under the supervision of poll watchers. The results, certified by the Secretary of State, are trustworthy and accurate.
The alternative favored by Humble and his supporters (understandably, since he lost the primary election to Johnson in 2022) is a “caucus” conducted by the county party (which in Williamson County is run by the Elevate 2025 slate endorsed by Humble’s group, Tennessee Stands). The caucus would be conducted in a manner similar to county GOP reorganization meetings using the disfavored “precinct convention” format. A caucus is generally held at a specific time and place, not over an extended period in multiple locations. Participants must generally pre-register. Absentee balloting is not permitted; personal attendance is required.
Caucuses undeniably disenfranchise most military personnel and are extraordinarily inconvenient for voters busy with work and family responsibilities. Voter participation will be suppressed (although to Team Humble, this may be a feature rather than a bug). Unlike elections, details regarding the caucus are not broadcast by the county election commission, but are communicated by the county party. The caucuses themselves are run by county party insiders. This includes determining eligibility to participate, tabulating the votes, etc. The biggest difference between primary elections and caucuses, however, is that not all self-identified GOP voters are allowed to participate in caucuses, whereas anyone identifying as a Republican can vote in the GOP primary.
County Republican parties would use the same complicated “bona fide” test used to determine eligibility to participate in biennial reorganization meetings to determine eligibility to cast a ballot in a caucus. Not all registered voters qualify. Would-be voters who manage to figure out when and where the insiders are holding the caucus may find themselves turned away because they did not meet the exacting requirements (such as voting in three out of the last four statewide GOP primaries, being deemed “actively involved” in the county party, and so forth).
Caucuses, in other words, are the ideal mechanism for county party insiders to manipulate the process to ensure that the insiders’ favored candidate wins. Caucuses empower cliques, not Tennessee voters. Before I moved to Williamson County, I lived in Blount County (south of Knoxville) for nearly six years. This is precisely how the insiders running the Blount County GOP rigged the biennial organization meetings to ensure that only “friendly” delegates were selected to choose the new executive committee. In the precinct conventions conducted during my tenure in Blount County, I personally witnessed lifelong Republican voters being turned away for nit-picky reasons, without recourse or unbiased review. Pre-registration allowed the insiders to pack the precinct conventions with known ringers so that the numbers favored the insiders.
The precinct conventions with rigged credential committees were a grotesque farce, resembling banana republic elections. The byzantine “bona fide” test was strictly applied to “outsiders,” while “insiders” who likely didn’t qualify were allowed to participate. It was the antithesis of “putting Tennessee voters in charge,” and played a large role in my decision to leave Blount County. Caucuses are an abomination that Humble (and the Elevate 2025 slate) only support because they know that it would be easy to rig them in their favor–unlike a fair and open primary election.
In typical Humble fashion, he tries to deflect the egregious self-interest at work by claiming he opposed HB 855/SB 799 because it violated Republicans’ “freedom of association.” This is just one more example of Humble dissembling with self-righteous (but spurious) rhetoric. Don’t fall for it! Humble’s avuncular façade, cloaked in faked sanctimony, masks his ruthless guile. Humble is not alone. His fringe acolytes in the General Assembly, including Reps. Monty Fritts and Jody Barrett (both of whom are running for higher office), voted against HB 855/SB 799.
Humble tried to strip Williamson County residents of their right to vote in a primary election because he knew it would be easier for his henchmen at the Williamson County GOP to rig a caucus outcome in their favor. And to think his platform claims he is committed to “election integrity”—while he really favors dispensing with primary elections altogether. Gary Humble is the ultimate phony, feigning piety while being willing to say or do anything to win. He is truly the Elmer Gantry of Tennessee politics.
