OSAGE COUNTY  — Constitution Party Midwest Regional Chairman Paul Venable and those in the organization believe vetting is an important process, while Osage County Democrat Central Committee Chairman Larry Hunt does not.

Venable noted the Constitution Party vetting committee conducts the process for candidates and leaders across Missouri. Vetting was in place before Venable moved to Missouri in 2017-18 and became Constitution Party Midwest Regional chairman in 2019.

In the lead-up to the 2022 General Election, the Constitution Party completed the process for three candidates, rejecting two of them. “Even though we had three other candidates, two of whom ran for Missouri House seats, and (myself) a candidate for United States Senate, we were previously vetted members and did not have to go through the process again,” said Venable. “We have not re-vetted candidates who had previously passed the process and were known to the membership.”

Venable added that in 2022, the party vetted three leadership candidates, one of whom was not accepted but who continued to actively support his candidacy for the U.S. Senate.

“Last year, we vetted a leadership candidate who did not pass the process, and this year, we’ve had a potential candidate for a statewide office who was also unapproved,” he said.

Hunt, meanwhile, said the Democratic Party is not using a vetting process. “I believe voters should be able to take candidates at their word as a candidate of the Democratic or Republican Party,” he added. “The Democratic Party has a recruiting process to find and encourage candidates to run for office from local state and national offices. With every election cycle, the word goes out for people interested in running for office to contact the Democratic Party as soon as possible.”

Hunt added this statewide recruitment process has been in place for more than 30 years. “We are always interested in talking to Democrat candidates for local, state, and federal offices, and help when and where we can,” he said. “Candidates and potential candidates are encouraged to attend Camp Carnahan to learn all the steps necessary to run for office. This includes legal issues and how to finance their campaign. The issue of money is many times the final ‘vetting’ and can take away voter’s choices, because the expense of running for office and being able to earn money until the election can stop good candidates from running.”

He also believes that voters must become educated about issues and candidates before casting their ballots.

Hunt noted that vetting takes away choices because candidates and officeholders refuse to sign up to be vetted, and the Republican Association of Central Committees of Missouri (REPACCMO) will not include an unvetted candidate on the ballot. “Candidates and voters should and must reject the outside influence creeping into our elections,” Hunt said. “Candidates who have played the game by being vetted are then indebted because potential candidates have been eliminated before the primary election for refusing to play their game.”

Venable doesn’t see it that way. “George Washington, in his farewell address as President, warned about the dangers of faction, and he was speaking specifically of political parties,” he said. “Over the decades, political parties began to reduce the choices of voters in the political marketplace and, at the current date, foster the divisions that our first President warned about. Instead of allowing candidates to run for office, political parties engage in down-selecting who appears on the ballot. Because the mindset of the people is baked into this paradigm, what you currently have are two opposing (supposedly) private entities that use tax dollars (primary elections) to limit the number of candidates to be considered in an election and which ‘… takes choice away from voters.’ In addition, the threshold for party participation throughout the nation is legislated by the two major parties, which, in some states, is nearly insurmountable. So who, again, is taking choice away from voters?”

He added that vetting allows us to hold them accountable and identifies issues before they can appear,” said Venable. “Our leaders and candidates represent the party brand.”

Venable suggested an alternative. “I have been in conversations with liberty-minded Republican Party members concerned about the roadblocks they encounter in having locally vetted candidates competing with candidates who are not,” he said. “I suggest that the caucus system would be far more effective in promoting this direction than the open primary practices in place at this time. It not only most effectively results in the true reflection of the will of party members protected by the First Amendment Right of Association, but it does not burden taxpayers with paying for the choices of private organizations, which political parties are.”