From An Election & The Supreme Rulings…

Well, a lot has happened within the last post.  With a special election over and two monumental rulings, even a state in political chaos and new adventures for the politically savvy, there is never a dull moment in my life and keeping up with the changing times.

            To pick up from my last post, the special election in South Carolina did not turn out in my favor.  Elizabeth Colbert-Busch did not win the congressional seat against former governor Mark Sanford.  I can’t say I’m surprised, given it is the most conservative district in the country, if only for South Carolina.  I don’t blame the candidate for her loss; nobody should ever fault the candidate in these campaigns.  I would argue that false hopes and misguided name recognition lead to the blind support of the Democratic party standing behind her in this race.  I also think the Democratic party was reluctant to stand by her because she was too conservative a “true democratic candidate” for their liking.  In the end, it is the experience that matters, and it is important to always look towards the next election and work to win that one. The object is to fight to win the next election; but one should never forget their losses, as it drives the desire to win the next race.

            May transcended into June, and the end of June brought the month went out with a loud bang. On the twenty-sixth of the month, the United States Supreme Court struck down the Defense of Marriage Act and also cited the Proposition Eight case from California, that it has no legal standing which meant they wouldn’t rule on it; thus, it allowed for the lower court’s decision to be upheld (which stated that Proposition Eight was unconstitutional in the state of California).  Both of these cases are huge victories for LGBT-individuals living in the United States [and the overall fight for Marriage Equality in the country]. 

Personally, I view these as good things for the United States regarding progressing for progress’ sake.  I do not believe that marriage is being “re-defined” or that the country’s moral standing will fall and the wrath of God will come down hard against this great nation. Nay, I believe that marriage has been extended to those outside of the “traditional” marriage practice and the state of California has the right to pass laws that are within the constitutional boundaries of the law. Since I am not a resident of that state, the Proposition Eight ruling does not apply to me; what does however is the Amendment One that was passed by 60% of the North Carolina voting populace in last year’s election cycle. As far as the law goes in the state of North Carolina: “Marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized”.  (NC Constitution, Article 14, Section 6)

            While we are talking about North Carolina, and the laws being passed within the state, it is important to focus on the General Assembly of the North Carolina State Legislature.  There have been a few bills that have been passed through the House of Representatives and/or the Senate that are not exactly promising when it comes to doing the best thing for the residents of the Tar Heel state.  The first issue is education and the battle to cut its funding. There is an incentive to have older teachers to retire early and to accept, as a parting gift, an extra $500.  The horrible thing is that it passed the House of Representatives! As far as I know, it is still being discussed in a senate committee. Let me backtrack a moment: After the election of 2012, the House, Senate, and Governorship went into the hands of Republicans (just stating a fact; this is how democracy works…whomever wins gets to be in power). 

            Now the House Republicans are trying to pass laws to limit education funding, revise the tax structure, and even pass anti-abortion measures attached to a law that is against Sharia law. First things first, I AM NOT ADVOCATING FOR SHARIA LAW (set aside the fact that it is Constitionally impossible for any religious based law to be followed in the USA); all I am saying is that we need to separate the real issues from “non-real” issues.  For example, the House republicans and Senate republicans have either passed, or will pass, a restructured tax base to allocate for tax breaks to the residents of North Carolina; the problem is that both houses have different views on what is the correct tax base formula.  Even Governor McCrory has stated that he will veto any bill that comes across his desk that would raise taxes on the middle class (which both plans do; Senate plan has middle class families paying more than $30 in taxes and I’m not sure about the House plan, but I’ll look into it and get back to you). I consider this to be an actual issue. The “non-real” issue is which plan saves North Carolina families…the answer: both plans, and the Governor knows it (which is why he’ll veto it...as it would haunt him around re-election time).

[The North Carolina Senate will vote today on their tax bill: The Senate Bill is #394 and the House Bill is #998]

As for the abortion rider in the bill against Sharia law (again, is Sharia law really a problem in North Carolina? Seriously?), this is also a thorn in the side for Governor McCrory as he stated in his campaign to become the Governor that he would not sign bills into law that would further restrict abortions. The sad thing is it might become law even if he vetoed the bill because they have the votes in the House to override him. When it comes to the real issue, such as abortion, we seem t have a lame duck governor in Raleigh. To review: Real issue – restricting abortions; “non-real” issue – Sharia law ever becoming the law in North Carolina (as it would be unconstitutional under our own state constitution, and the fact that the United States Constitution is the true law over all fifty states [and the territories] and that North Carolina was in the “God-fearing” south). Come to think this about it, how is that bill not unconstitutional?

The Young One & some political chats...

As I am writing this, I am starting the magical drive down hill towards 30! It feels odd, to say the least.


     Anyway, so thinking about the things going on within the past few days (and weeks) has rendered some thoughts.  This is regarding the new Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense nominee, the Boy Scouts, and the gun debate. Let's begin!
     In case you haven't been keeping up with the news, outgoing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton testified before Congress on the attacks at the American Embassy in Benghazi, Libya that resulted in four deaths including the ambassador. Now, I just happened to listen to this while driving back from my wonderful time in DC for the inauguration. Now, Secretary Clinton can hold her own ground and is very tough. She didn't back down from Senators McCain, Paul, or Johnson. It is true she got grilled on the issues, but in the end she was able to relay her point across about the situation at the time.  It seems odd that Republicans would want to imply that Secretary Clinton wasn't up for the job or even the handling of the situation; in fact, they even questioned her judgement.  While I do understand their point and frustration, it is important to remember that this is the same Republican Party that lead the United States into Iraq over "Weapons of Mass Destruction" and it was the intelligence reports of Ambassador Condoleezza Rice & then-Secretary of State Colin Powell. In addition, it was also this Republican Party that chose Alaska governor Sarah Palin to be placed on the Republican ticket in 2008 in a failed attempt to gain the women voters. It is the same party that had members of its own choose not to go to meetings on the [Capitol] Hill regarding security concerns for the embassies in the area; and, it is also this Republican Party that has failed to vote on any budget measures to enhance money allocated for embassy security...but, as usual, it is President Obama's fault and anyone within his administration.
     Since the hearing, Secretary Clinton has left her post and the senior senator from Massachusetts, John Kerry, has taken the helm at the State Department.  While I applaud his advancement and look forward to his service, I still don't agree that it would be wise to allow the Republicans a chance to gain a seat in the Senate (even if it isn't likely, I wouldn't tempt it). All in all, Secretary Kerry will do a fine job and I wish him the best.  As for the other cabinet position, that will be a little more of a fight.  Former senator Chuck Hagel has been nominated to succeed Leon Panetta at the Defense Department. There are concerns over his remarks, in the past, regarding: the state of Israel; homosexuals, supporting cuts to the defense department, sanctions on Iran, and a number of other issues. I won't go into every item I just mentioned, but I will say this: I do believe that he is a good fit for the job at hand. I also believe it is certainly wrong for members of his own political party (that's right, he is a Republican from Nebraska) to oppose his confirmation based on their "concerns" or whatever term they choose to hid behind. I think that this nomination, among other issues, will create an even bigger civil war within the Republican Party.
     One of the other headlines in the news is regarding the Boy Scouts of America.  They are considering eliminating the ban for gay scouts and adults from participating.  In fact, there was supposed to give a statement on the overall conclusion this week; but, they felt that it was getting to heated on both sides of the argument and have chosen to make a determination on the future of the ban in May at the annual Executive Council meeting.  As a former boy scout (yes, I was a boy scout and yes, I still hate camping and the outdoors in general) I just don't see the point. There are plenty of gay scouts and it is not like they push their beliefs onto others. I know supporters of the ban are citing the Boy Scout Oath. I know that oath by heart and I know plenty of people who say things after repeating it for so many times. But, let's look at the Oath......let just open out Hymns to page 281910 (I hope someone understands that number and the irony of it within this topic):

"On my honor I will do my best
To do my duty to God and my country
and to obey the Scout Law;
To help other people at all times;
To keep myself physically strong,
mentally awake, and morally straight."

Now, let's just break this down...line-by-line:

     On my honor I will do my best: honor according to whom? I could have a bad honor as a gay scout, but the straight scout that lies all the time is considered to have good honor? So we are to judge a person's character? Also, one should always do their best.
     To do my duty to God & my country:  Well, what if one does not believe in God? Are they still able to join?  How does one prove that they are doing their duty to God, or much less believe in God? Everyone should do their duty to the their country.
     and to obey the Scout law: Oh yes, the scout law.....who else can do this beside me?
     Well, a Scout is -

• Trustworthy
• Loyal
• Helpful
• Friendly
• Courteous
• Kind
• Obedient
• Cheerful
• Thrifty
• Brave
• Clean 
• Reverent 

     ....Too many thoughts regarding the laws so I'll elaborate more on those later.
     To help other people at all times: Well, so tend to the sick, needy, and those who aren't able to help themselves? You mean the 47%??? Well, that's socialism and that is UN-American!!! (Make sure you note the sarcasm because I'm not a republican if you didn't know)
     To keep myself physically strong: well, this makes sense.....if you stay in shape you don't have to go to the hospital as much and we don't have to pay for you to get better EVEN though a "psychically fit" individual can go to the emergency room for a toothache or a running nose and we are happy to help them out. If you aren't strong then I won't be able to help you even though it's what "honorable" people do (sarcasm is still in play here).
     To keep myself mentally awake & morally straight: So if a scout falls asleep or doesn't pay attention in a merit badge class (I never did except for Environmental Science because I didn't understand the point of it) does that mean they should be kicked out of the program?  How about the Straight scoutmaster who has been divorced three times, is he morally straight?  What about the older scouts that drink when they get together on the weekends or drink with their Scoutmasters (yeah, it goes on...just saying)?  What about the straight scouts that become recreational drug users when they are not a troop meeting, but still fall under the guidelines of "you can miss X amount of meetings before....."?
     I think the Boy Scouts of America should be able to except, and embrace, all its members and reinstate those that have been kicked out of the program for their sexuality.  One last thing, I find it extremely ironic that the same NONPROFIT that gives the most money to the Boy Scouts is the same that funded the Proposition 8 in the state of California. Forget about the Church & state argument, if you are going to politic from the pulpit, then it's time you loose your tax-exempt status, pay up, and pay up for your back taxes. I'll proudly support the rights of same-sex couples.
     Well, I planned on speaking about the gun debate.  Honestly, nothing for me has changed on this issue so if you would like to know how I feel, please read the piece I wrote two-or-three posts back.

Let's play catch up!

Okay, so I've already broken my new year's resolution by not blogging every day.  So, I will attempt to run through things since my last post.  Here we go!

The New Year was wonderful and I spent it with friends. I did manage to win a few games of Twister and Trivial Pursuit.  After all of that. I drove up to Washington, D.C. and stayed for the 57th Inauguration of President Obama! I was going to volunteer, but I was able to get a ticket so I was very happy.  It was so wonderful and it marks the second inauguration I've ever been too. Actually, I have been to both of President Obama's Inaugurations which makes sense because he is my President. I feel very strongly for him like many felt for President Kennedy back in the 1960s. I've been there supporting President Obama since the primaries and have stood beside him and will continue to do so until his term is done. I actually went to the parade this time and was on the U.S. Capitol Building lawn (unlike four years ago when I was standing at the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services with my best friend).  It was so much warmer this time around and the lines at Starbucks took only ten minutes unlike an hour four years ago. The day after, I attended the DNC meeting and what a wonderful experience that was.  I always love seeing the faces of those that I've worked with in various campaigns and network with others to progress the Democratic cause. I even got to witness the re-election of Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz as the DNC Chairwoman. Oh I almost forgot, I was on CNN & CSPAN multiple times!!! I even saw Don Lemon 7 my idol - Anderson Cooper!!! :D
   Since returning to North Carolina, I've decided to hold off on Graduate school (I know, but I'm still trying to figure out what I want to do with my life).  In fact, my current obstacle is whether I should keep working campaigns and issues, or go to either graduate or law school.  I know if I go to graduate school, I would want to obtain a MPA and if I go to law school, I would want to do either constitutional or human rights law.  In the meantime, I'm just studying for the GRE (yet again) and planning on taking it within the next three months.

   I guess I will go ahead and stop here and figure out what my next post will be about.  Although, now that I think about it, I have a few ideas. So, stay tuned....

Secretary of State: Who should get it & who will get it (Part 1)

As President Obama’s first term draws to a close, the beginning of a second term is rapidly approaching.  During the transition from first to second term, the American public knows there will be some changes to some important cabinet positions.  Both the secretaries of State & Treasury will retire from their posts. Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner is not the most popular person to hold the position, but the individual who will replace him will have a lot of cleaning up to do (and will probably have a harder confirmation process than the next Secretary of State).  In addition to this cabinet position, the more important role to fill will be the Secretary of State.  As Hillary Clinton “retires” from politics, it will become a fierce battle over who will be nominated, who will survive the confirmation hearings, and who will ultimately become the next Secretary of State to represent the United States on a global scale.

            The Secretary of State is the fifth most powerful role within the United States Government – in the event of a tragic event that resulted in either death of the President or his in inability to faithfully execute his powers of the Presidency.  This position within the federal government is addresses all of the foreign relations that the United States encompasses on a daily basis.  There are many names going around regarding who will fill this important position. (Such names are usually referred to as “being on the short list”.) I will discuss a few of these names and why they are on the list and whether it would be a good idea for them to fill the position – or not.

            The first name on the list would be the current United States Ambassador to the United Nations – Susan Rice. If she would be confirmed, she would be the fourth woman to ever hold this post.  Already well-versed in National Security issues as well as international issues & crises’, Dr. Rice has the ability to be resilient when needed and understands the power of negotiations. While she is a admirable and highly distinguished candidate for this position, I do not believe it would be wise to place her within such position.   We need a strong voice within the United Nations, and she has the reputation to get things moving in a sometimes stalled-out body of governance.  In addition, I feel that she would struggle with the confirmation hearing within the United States Senate halls.  Some would refer to her handling of the terrorist attack in Benghazi, which resulted in four deaths including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens. 

Regardless of her role about what she did or did not know, some senators make a semi-valid point about when to share sensitive information without being 100% confirmed. The argument of whether she is qualified or not becomes a moot point, as there are many who have held public office that were not qualified to be in a position of power…much less being nominated to hold a federal position (former President George W. Bush – post 9/11 – and former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin immediately come to mind……and to be fair, one could argue former President Lyndon Johnson & former South Dakota Senator Tom Daschle). Her confirmation process would just become a façade for the Republican Party.  If the Republicans did decide to confirm her nomination, it would be a political maneuver to prove that they are not sexist (and also to earn back the huge gap they had when Romney lost to President Obama in the 2012 election). If confirmed, she would do an exceptional job.

            Another name that has been discussed is Senator John Kerry f Massachusetts.  He certainly has the international respect of to hold such a position; and, as a member of the Senator Foreign Relations committee, he understands the highly classified intelligence gathered within the government of an international crisis.  I also image he would be considered because of his pivotal role in re-electing President Obama during the election cycle. The only problem I really see with this nomination is that Democrats are trying to maintain a steady majority of the United States Senate. It would be unwise for them to leave a seat open that might be open to Republican grabs. I think the worst thing to do is re-elect Scott Brown to stand alongside Elizabeth Warren to represent the Bay State in the Senate. If he were to be nominated and confirmed by the Senate, it would prove (much like the Susan Rice confirmation) that Republicans are trying to be more bipartisan and are attempting to regroup after their party was severely crushed in the 2012 elections. Republicans have a lot of regrouping to do and need to quickly adapt to the changing times…and demographics.

           

            I have much more to discuss regarding this conversation, so please stay tuned as I provide a valid solution (yet probably not even considered) for the fulfillment of this important cabinet position.

The Final Push to Re-elect Barack Obama as President

Well, after a long election cycle, the end is almost here.  I know I’ve spent hours calling, hours canvassing, hours writing letters to editors, and hours convincing voters why they should vote to keep President Obama in office.  If you are still undecided, here are some of the reasons I voted for President Obama (and yes, voting is past tense because I live in North Carolina which is an early voting state):

1.     He saved the auto industry and also prevented another Great Depression;

2.     He has had 32 consecutive months of job growth (5.4 million of those new jobs were in the private sector);

3.     He eliminated dozens of Al Qaeda leaders including Osama Bin Laden;

4.     He Signed the Affordable Care Act with vastly improves the healthcare of all Americans, including those with pre-existing conditions, senior citizens, and women;

5.     He strongly supports women’s rights and has appointed two women to the United States Supreme Court…one of them being the first Hispanic on the court;

6.     He has lowered taxes for a majority of Americans and believes in the top percent to pair their fair share;

7.     He has ended the War in Iraq as well as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”;

8.     He has signed into law the Lily Ledbetter Act, which allows equal pay for women;

9.     He has ensured that student loan rates not double for millions of students across the country…he even increased Pell Grant spending;

10.  He is in support of Same-sex marriage as well as the Dream Act;

11.  He was opposed to the Arizona Law regarding immigration (and the U.S. Supreme Court agreed with him);

12.  He appointed a commission to protect consumers from wasteful fees;

13.  He supports the state of Israel;

14.  He has enhanced financial regulatory measures; and,

15.  He has unemployment under eight percent (8%).

I truly believe we are on the correct course and we need to make sure Barack Obama remains President of the United States. I think President Obama will win re-election by taking the following states – which will lead to him winning 309 out of 538 electoral votes:

Washington; Hawaii; Oregon; California; Nevada; New Mexico; Colorado; Kansas; Missouri; Iowa; Minnesota; Michigan; Wisconsin; Louisiana; Illinois; Maine; New Hampshire; Vermont; Massachusetts; New Jersey; Delaware; Maryland; NORTH CAROLINA; Connecticut; Rhode Island, and Ohio.

I think that the United States Senate will stay in the control of the Democrats.  In fact, I believe they will pick up three seats: one from Wisconsin, one from Maine, and one from Massachusetts.

I think the United States House of Representatives will return to the Democratic Majority as well, and Nancy Pelosi will get her gavel back.  I think wins in WA-1 (Suzan DelBene), NH-1 & -NH-2 (Carol Shea Porter & Ann Kuster), CA-35 (Dr. Raul Ruiz), NC-11 (Hayden Rogers), NC-10 (Patsy Keever), and many more will be great for the Democratic Party as well.

I am actually really proud of the state of New Hampshire because I believe they will make history and have an all-female delegation (Yes, I am endorsing Maggie Hassan if you didn’t already know)! I also think that Minnesota will vote No on Amendment 2 and Washington state will Approve of Referendum 74. I also think that Maryland will vote for question 6 and Maine will vote in favor of Same-sex marriage.

In less than twenty-four hours, we will (hopefully) know what the next four years will look like.  Will it be a road continuing to progress, or a road leading backwards?  I do hope it’s FORWARD and get FOUR MORE YEARS of PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA!!! Yes We Can, Sí se Puede!!

Burning the Midnight Oil in the U.S. Senate Chambers

Well, one could say the Senators are finally earning their pay as they stay in Washington over the weekend!  Multiple things to discuss - the Rand Paul Amendment (regarding foreign policy). This amendment is to ensure that aid to Pakistan, Egypt, & Libya will be restricted immediately.  This is mainly due to the unrest within the region and the stated nations do not hold the same values as the United States.  Earlier today, Senator Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) made a pleading case that the United States needs to "stop funding dictators" and to also allow the chance for the United States to take a lesson from the "Arab Spring" and the events surrounding the fallen dictators within the region.  I find it interesting that Senator Paul would attempt to compare the "Arab Spring" to something the United States should endure.  While the junior senator from Kentucky was talking about the various dictators using the aid on their family (by buying Bentleys, Ferraris, and other high-priced cars) instead of giving to the people, he also reminded the listeners that those citizens - I remember he named African countries  in general - living off of of $2.00 USD a day.  I guess I am a little confused by this: It is not okay to fund those that clearly have money and (abuse such allocations) while the working citizens get no results in a foreign nation; but, it is not okay to have the wealthiest of our citizens to pay a little more, because they clearly have money also, and provide services to the working & middle class within our own county's borders?  Furthermore, how is it okay to give "tax breaks" or "tax incentives" (feel free to use whichever rhetorical term that most aligns with your political preference) to the very "American dictators" who were in charge of our financial system which is finally starting to get off life support?
     I also find it interesting that even members of Senator Paul's own party are against this notion.  On CNN's show: Erin Burrnett: Outfront, Ranking member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee John McCain stated that this was a bad idea.  He actually said that "these isolationist members of our party fail to look at history. In the [19]30s & 40s under Eisenhower, after World War II, because of our isolationist thought we suffered dearly for it.  Whenever we attempt to return or conceive that isolationist idea without looking at history, we always come to a unfortunate ending."*
     I really don't believe this amendment will pass, as it needs sixty votes.  If anything, Senator Rand Paul may get 8 votes on his amendment (if that).  Time will tell.

*I am certain I paraphrased his quote. Also, I was off the votes by two.

Fired Up & Ready to Go - DNC Aftermath

     Well, I've had time to recover from all of the excitement of the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, NC.  What a wonderful experience! I enjoyed seeing, and meeting, so many new people.  I met so many amazing political figures; for example, I shared an elevator with General Wesley Clark (and met Congressman Kucinich)!!!  The speeches were wonderful and very inspiring as well!
     First things first, I was so honored to be apart of two historic caucuses!  For the record, I did attend four caucuses: The Hispanic caucus, the Disabilities Caucus, the LGBT caucus, and the Women's Caucus (I also attended the Small Business Council).  Each of these caucuses are important in one way or another to me.  The only thing I can really say, regardless of your political affiliation -you should at least go to one convention.  It is certainly a "wow" moment. I even got quoted in the StarTribune and appeared on MSNBC's Hardball With Chris Matthews!  There is so much I could write about my time at the DNC, but I will try not to bore you too much with it.
     In other news though, and I promise it isn't political, I'm taking a class at Western Carolina this semester.  Furthermore, I have been accepted as a non-degree seeking student next semester which will allow me to take classes and figure out what I really want to get my Master's degree in regarding a field of study.  I am still deciding whether it will be Public Administration or English with a concentration in Composition & Rhetoric.  Speaking of Rhetoric, the class I am taking this semester is...Political Rhetoric!  I love the class so far even though I'm not a fan of Immanuel Kant.
     Okay, back to politics for a second.  While I know that I wrote a blog entry supporting Hayden Rogers, I am really not sure if I can fully support him in the general election.  The main reason is that he is a "blue dog" democrat and I am a "yellow dog" democrat.  I know I certainly will NOT be voting for Mark Meadows (anyone who is endorsed by Rick Santorum will NEVER receive my vote). As for the governor's race....Walter Dalton all the way!  I also hope Minnesota will vote No on their amendment; and, I hope Washington State will approve Referendum 74. Maine & Maryland will hopefully vote in favor of the LGBT community.  With 50 days left, I will continue to campaign for all of the issues and causes that I believe and support.

By the way, it feels great to write a blog post and I really have to write more of them. Also, I'm the one waving in a white long-sleeve shirt and I think I am holding up four fingers chanting, "4 more years!"

            First Lady Michelle Obama speaking at the Women's Caucus!

Paul Ryan: Romney's #2

     Okay, props to Mitt Romney for allowing President Obama a second term!!!  I, like many others within my field of work, was somewhat surprised at his choice of Paul Ryan as his running mate.  I think in the end it will hurt Romney, not just because Ryan is such a risky candidate; but, mainly because he undermines (and arguably turned his back on) the south.
     Let's start at the beginning - a very good place to start (and points to those who get the reference) - Paul Davis Ryan was born on January 27, 1970.  He is a member of "Generation X" which I find personally fascinating, yet a little creepy - for the record, he is eight days older than my father.  He graduated from Miami University in Ohio.  He was in multiple clubs and organization both in high school and college.  A funny piece of information is the fact that we was a "frat boy" - being a member of Delta Tau Delta.
     After college, he went to work with various politicos in Washington, D.C.  Some of them included Sam Brownback (former senator and current Governor of Kansas), Bob Kasten (former Senator of Wisconsin), and Empower America (a conservative think-tank in DC).  When he finally did get elected to Congress by the constituents of Wisconsin's First Congressional District, he was twenty-eight years old.  After getting elected by only fifty-four percent of the votes cast, Paul Ryan was assigned to the following committees: House Budget Committee (where he would eventually become Chairman of the Committee); the Committee of Ways & Means; and, the subcommittee on Health.  Furthermore, he was a part of a number of caucuses in the House of Representatives including the Congressional Middle East Economic Parliament; the International Conservative Caucus; the Representative Stud Committee; and, the Sportsman Committee (where he would become the co-chair).
     It seems odd that Mitt Romney would chose a rogue from the Midwest.  There is little chance that Romney will even win one - if any - of the Midwest states.  He really needs to focus on the south.

Alabama, Georgia, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Tennessee....what do all of these states have in common? These are the states Mitt Romney failed to win the GOP Primary in both the 2008 & the 2012 election cycles. From 2008 to the present, Mitt Romney did not even win in the states he won in 2008 - like Minnesota, North Dakota, Maine and Colorado.  If Mitt Romney wants to have a fighting chance at being President, he should have chosen a running mate though could deliver the South.  Now this is not to say that "The South will Rise again" rhetoric is accurate, but i really believe that by adding Paul Ryan to the ticket does nothing for those that cast their support behind John McCain or Mike Huckabee [back in 2008], and Newt Gingrich or Rick Santorum [this election cycle].
      In all honestly, Paul Ryan would be the better candidate for President because he relates more to the average American.  However, the fact that he is backed by a majority of Tea Party supporters, has no idea how to appeal to female voters and wants to cut funding to everything under the sun, except to the military [and wants government out of the people's lives unless it involves telling a woman what they can and can't do with their body, telling people who they can and can't marry, and telling students to fend for themselves when it comes to their education] makes him the most divisive running mate in the history of the country.  To put it another way, Paul Ryan is Palin 2.0 (and yes, this is Romney's GameChanger).