Two Simple Questions for Republican State Central Committee Members
Forty-Four Ohioans Shouldn't Have the Power to Stack the Deck in Republican Primaries
The letter below was sent to all sixty-six Republican State Central Committee members this morning. We will need all of the help we can get, so please let me know if you want to participate in this vital endeavor to keep the playing field level in Republican primaries.
_______
Dear Republican State Central Committee Member:
I hope this email finds you are doing well and having a good summer.
My name is Matt Mayer and I am currently exploring a run for Ohio governor in 2026. With the upcoming Republican State Central Committee (SCC) meeting on Friday, September 8, I wanted to submit two questions for you about the endorsement process. I will be having a meet and greet before that meeting, so I hope to meet you in person. As you know, with 2026 being an open seat election, per Article VI, Section 2(a) of the Republican State Central and Executive Committee of Ohio Permanent Rules, any statewide endorsement would have to secure forty-four of the sixty-six votes, or two-thirds of all SCC members. Additionally, as the rule states, unlike in 2022 when all statewide office holders were up for reelection, the SCC cannot vote for all offices using one vote; rather, they must vote on each non-incumbent race.
Before raising my questions, I want to be clear that the SCC always should possess the power to protect the best interest of the Republican Party to secure victory when facing a rare two-person primary election in which one candidate possesses mental, criminal, or other damaging deficiencies that would result in losing the general election. Under this rare “James Traficant” exception, the SCC should endorse the other candidate to prevent a November loss. However, when the primary election involves two or more viable candidates, SCC members in their official capacities should remain neutral. As Proverbs 27:17 states, “As iron sharpens iron, so one person sharpens another.” I believe vigorous competition between candidates will make the ultimate winner stronger. That belief isn’t just wishful thinking—I experienced that outcome in the top U.S. House race in America as a Campaign Manager when the consensus was that the tough primary strengthened our party for the general election, which we won by a razor-thin 121 votes out of 170,000 votes cast. If a candidate in line for an endorsement is as good as SCC members believe, he or she shouldn’t need an SCC endorsement to win.
With that being said, here are my questions:
(1) Do you believe the SCC should endorse candidates for statewide offices in open seats when there are at least two viable candidates?
As last year’s Republican primary election showed, a majority of Republican primary voters did not agree with the SCC endorsement of the Mike DeWine-Jon Husted ticket when it only mustered 48% of the vote as incumbents. Assuming it is a three- or four-person race with all candidates being viable, it is very unlikely that the winner of the Republican primary election for governor in 2026 will secure 50% of the vote. Thus, SCC involvement would again be contrary to the will of a majority of Republican primary voters.
(2) Do you believe the SCC should endorse using secret ballots?
Secrecy breeds frustration, contempt, suspicions, and disunity. Transparency always should be used so candidates and Republican voters know exactly how each SCC member voted. This above-the-board approach will ensure that when SCC members are up for reelection, voters can hold them accountable for one of the most powerful acts they took as SCC members.
Of note, I am not seeking pro-Matt Mayer SCC support; rather, I am just seeking to determine which SCC members are pro- versus anti-endorsement. I’m more than happy to face my competitors on a level playing field.
To be clear, I am sending this note with these questions not just on my behalf. I send it for all of the viable candidates who throw their hat in the arena only to see some SCC members place their thumbs on the scale in favor of one candidate. In the race I expect to be part of, Attorney General Dave Yost and Treasurer Robert Sprague, both of whom the SCC endorsed in 2022, will face the same headwinds as I do should the SCC endorse in our race. Even earlier, in the open U.S. Senate race in 2024, there are currently three viable candidates in Secretary of State Frank LaRose, State Senator Matt Dolan, and businessman Bernie Moreno. These men should be able to scrap it out in the primary without extra help from the SCC.
This email is in response to the effort I was told about in which SCC members known to oppose endorsing in primaries and/or who oppose the twenty-two Ohio Republican House members who voted with Democrats for a different Speaker are being targeted to be replaced in the 2024 SCC elections. In fact, one candidate’s team made calls to all sixty-six SCC members for this very purpose. I feel so strongly about this issue that I am putting my money where my mouth is by committing a five-figure amount to the defense of those targeted and to defeat vulnerable SCC members who are pro-endorsement. I've asked others to match my commitment. In just twenty-four hours, I secured six figure commitments to defend anti-endorsement SCC members and to target vulnerable SCC members who are pro-endorsement. I'm confident we will secure significantly more funds in the coming weeks and months. I hope AG Yost, Treasurer Sprague, Senator Dolan, and Mr. Moreno will join me in this effort and commit to give/secure additional funds to defend those targeted SCC members and oust vulnerable pro-endorsement SCC members. For those of you who are not familiar with my background, I am highly skilled at digging into data. I am already analyzing all thirty-three SCC districts to identify those SCC members most likely to be defeated in a primary.
If there is going to be a fight on this issue, I can’t allow it to be one-sided. To be sure, I don’t want to have to wage this battle, but I will not sit back and knowingly allow forty-four people to unfairly boost one candidate over other viable candidates because it is viewed as “his turn.” You can do what you want in your personal capacity to back whomever you want, but you should not use your power as an SCC member to give one candidate an advantage, especially when that candidate is unlikely to secure 50% of the vote of those who elected you. Ideally, if at least twenty-three SCC members commit to oppose endorsements except in "James Traficant" cases, then we can all move forward without expending resources better used to defeat the radical left-wing initiatives on the November ballot and to get rid of Sherrod Brown next year.
I look forward to your simple “yes” or “no” responses by September 7, 2023. I will take your lack of a response as a “yes, I support endorsements and secret ballots” and proceed accordingly in your district. Please feel free to touch base with any questions or concerns you have on this email or come see me before the upcoming SCC meeting to discuss it.
Best,
Matt A. Mayer
Mayer for Governor 2026