[candidate-development] [adcom] [statecom] Special State Committee Meeting now in session

[Eli Beckerman]

Hi Grace,

You write:

" And as we have not agreed to an apportionment in either CDLC nor Adcom, it
is appropriate I believe to continue to list the options which will be
available to Statecom".

And I disagree, based on two reasons:

Reason 1: The 4/12/08 State Committee meeting weighed in on these questions,
and delivered a compromise by which we affirmed that these are still
candidates -- up to the point when the first ballot is cast. After that
point, committed delegates to "non-candidates" are free to vote as they
choose. This was the best we could do to affirm the vote and to
simultaneously protect our members from being bound to vote continually for
an absent "candidate".

Reason 2: Since you disagree with Reason 1, it would have been necessary for
AdCom (as per our delegate selection plan) to revise the CDLC allocation. If
you read the final sentence of the relevant passage in the plan ("If the
Administrative Committee still does not agree with the calculations that
determine the results, then they have one (1) week to revise them or they
are accepted."). The 5/26/08 AdCom meeting was the opportunity (despite it
happening well over a week later) to revise the CDLC allocation ("or they
are accepted").

I believe that the "options" are settled. I'd like to see us move forward
for once instead of sideways and around and down. I hope you might agree.

Best,
Eli