“Your suggestion of a `right-wing conspiracy theory’ really isn’t that far off.”

As soon as I heard those words I knew that my work was getting somewhere. Really, it wasn’t my work at all, it all just dropped in my lap. When top members of the College Republican National Executive Committee (CRNEC) started e-mailing me with “disturbing information,” I realized that the students at Saint Louis University have had the wool pulled over their eyes for years now.

Within a few days I had discovered just how far one of the school’s most powerful conservative students would go to further his agenda. What I discovered, went even further than SLU.

Within a couple of hours, I had established even stronger links between the Great Issues Committee (GIC) and one of the top seats of the CRNEC. It started when I contacted Robert Painter, former state chairman and national chairman of the CRNEC, and former National Youth Coordinator for Robert Dole’s presidential campaign. He confirmed that James Harris, current First Vice-Chairman of the CRNEC, was “chest-beating about the number of conservative speakers he had brought to SLU” by manipulating the GIC.

These comments had been made at a meeting of the National Committee last weekend in Minneapolis. Previous conservative big-name speakers have included Margaret Thatcher, Oliver North, Maria Molina and will include Michael Medved. An attempt to bring former Vice President Dan Quayle fell through at the last moment. Quayle’s appearance was cancelled due to the announcement of his presidential candidacy.

Harris even took credit for bringing Charlton Heston to SLU, according to Painter. For me, this was the confirmation I sought after attempting to make a connection between the GIC and College Republicans during the recent Charlton Heston visit.

I was able to establish exactly how control of the GIC was attained. Three years ago SLU’s Student Government Association separated all events-planning committees from its constitution, including the GIC. At that time Nathan Cooper, former GIC chair and then a law student, had the opportunity to re-write the GIC’s rules, and he included a statute that gave members their position for their entire career at SLU.

Other stipulations have allowed those who sit on the committee to nominate graduating member’s replacements. According to Painter, Cooper was known for the high number of conservative and GOP speakers that he brought in as head of the Speaker’s Committee while in his undergraduate studies at Southeast Missouri State University. Cooper continued this trend while at SLU, and the conservative members of his committee continued to keep a strong contingent of College Republican members making the decisions. This was how Harris came to the committee a few years ago.

From the conversation with Painter, I was able to speak with current and former members of the CRNEC who spoke of other assertions made by Harris. These members assured me that they had worked closely with Harris in the past and had even run on one ticket with him during elections for the National Committee. Two national level College Republicans who wish to remain anonymous told me that Harris bragged about how he was going to “screw the administration and the liberals at SLU.”

I was able to confirm through Interim Vice Provost for Student Development, Kathy Humphrey, that her office had offered money to the GIC to help them balance the kind of messages that GIC speakers were sending to the students. According to Painter, Harris spoke to fellow National Committee members about how he was going to use that money to embarrass those who would support a liberal speaker. Harris approached Painter and asked if he could recommend a speaker whose event could be manipulated to make it such an embarrassment. Painter said that he believed that it would not be uncommon for College Republicans to use such committees as the GIC to present conservative speakers, and “that these organizations were used to stifle debate, and further an agenda.” However, Painter believed that, “Harris is taking it to another level.”

I can’t assume how this embarrassment would happen; however, Painter gave an example from the University of Nevada-Las Vegas. At UNLV, liberal leaders brought in former Klu Klux Klan member and presidential candidate David Duke to make a mockery of conservative views.

My main concern was why national-level College Republicans, of all people, were calling to tell me this. Three of the people I spoke with on the national level told me that Harris’ election to the College Republican National Executive Board was questionable. Jesse Binnall, former PAC President of the California College Republicans, reported that Harris’ credentials presented to the CRNEC were “questionable at best, and fraudulent at worst.”

Binnall was shocked that the credentials given to the CRNEC while Harris was the Missouri State Chairman gave Missouri “the largest amount of delegates for the whole convention, when the state could not produce more than 10 delegates.”

Jeremy Mainard, the state chairman of the West Virginia College Republicans, agreed with that perception, saying that the 10 delegates attending seemed “very fishy” for a state with so many people.

The significance of the credentials for Missouri lies in the fact that the large number reported earns the Missouri delegation a greater number of votes in the committee elections. Since Harris was running for National Vice Chairman position that year, the increased votes, and especially the large involvement at SLU, significantly increased his chances of getting elected.

Both Binnall and Mainard said that they believed that the numbers were padded. Binnall said that it “makes the voter fraud that Chicago was famous for look miniature.”

I contacted Harris yesterday and asked him about the comments his peers were making. He said that he did not know how many students were with the College Republicans this year, but he said that in 1997, there were between 400-450.

A point of interest is that the largest organization on campus (student government association) has only 150 members. Current SLU College Republican President Mike Benoist said that the club has between 60 and 70 members now enrolled, of whom nine to 25 regularly attending club meetings. Harris said that when he presented Missouri’s credentials to the CRNEC, he only listed one chapter as a “super-club,” indicating that it had more than 400 members.

That chapter was either Southwest Missouri State University or the University of Missouri-Columbia. The others, especially SLU, were not “super-clubs.” He said that he could verify the fact that the information was correct, since there was an audit in 1997 of all “super-club” claims.

But in a conversation with John Yob, College Republican National Committee General Chairman, who is in charge of record keeping, Yob reported that SLU’s chapter was currently a “superclub.” When I asked for an official definition of “super-club,” he confirmed that it was a chapter with more than 400 members.

So, why do I write all this?

Many people will probably believe that I am looking to “get at” Harris for my disagreement with him on issues. But I simply noted that his behavior at the Heston event was insulting and frustrating.

I have no need to criticize him. I do not wish to be accused of “unwarranted personal attacks.” He is starting graduate school in January and is on his way out. And I certainly don’t make it a habit of trashing opponents of my opinions in public.

I am a relatively small person, who really has no need to pick a fight with an entire organization or with an outspoken individual.

My concern can be summed up simply: For months, and possibly years, people have suggested that the GIC was being controlled by the College Republicans, yet no one deeply investigated the issue. Unfortunately, no one noticed such strong influence over a committee earlier. By now, it is mostly over.

I have full faith now in the committee and its members. I spoke with current GIC Chairman Derek Goewert about how he feels about all this. His actions mostly spoke for themselves. Harris used his position as State Chairman of the Missouri Federation of College Republicans to appoint Goewert to the position of Executive Director. It is common that this position be filled with a friend of the person who makes the appointment. The national-level College Republicans I spoke with compared Goewert’s position to that of a Chief of Staff. Last week, after hearing about Harris’ comments about his involvement with the committee, Goewert resigned his position.

Harris said that he would have to talk to Goewert about why he resigned, and that Harris assumed that it was because Goewert was so busy.

In our interview, Goewert said that he “wasn’t happy with James’ talking credit out of his place.” Goewert responded, “I want to sever all professional ties with James.” He believed that that separation was best while he attempted to make changes to the GIC. I commend Goewert on this wise move. After speaking with Humphrey and Goewert, I am certain that both are very dedicated to working with the student senate and their bill that passed last evening, to better represent all sides of the issues brought up. In his resignation letter, Goewert promised “to continue my work to bring an issue-oriented balance to the public debate in the university community.”

I hate to publicize such critical information about a fellow Billiken, but I felt it necessary to open the eyes of the community so that they could see an example of how one student’s misrepresentation can affect this campus. In the future, I encourage the students and staff of SLU to question imbalances more often, and to beware that these imbalances can indeed permeate our iron fences.

I am confident that, as a reporter, Goewert and I can work together to give the students what they want, and that we can celebrate an environment of open education and free debate.