[GNC] Re: Ballot Access

[Owen Broadhurst]

Mike,

The Cobb campaign agrees and has made statements to this affect:

"David Cobb, who beat out Nader to become the Green Party presidential candidate this year and appeared with Camejo at the Monday press conference, offered a rare defense of his former opponent: "Look, the Democrats and the Republicans have conspired to create ballot access laws to prevent alternative voices. But what the Democrats are doing here is unprecedented." - July 27, Hartford Courant

GPUS co-chair Peggy Lewis also made the following comments:

"The two old parties, in enacting restrictive ballot access laws, have rigged the system in many states to exclude other parties and independent candidates," said Peggy Lewis, co-chair of the Green Party of the United States. 

"Voters benefit from having several candidates and parties on the ballot from which to choose who best represents their interests and ideals. Greens have challenged Democrats and Republicans to implement reforms like Instant Run-off Voting, Proportional Representation, and Clean Election options in order to make elections fairer. Instead, many Democrats have tried to obstruct candidates from outside of the two established parties, with Ralph Nader the latest target. The outrage that Democrats faced in Florida in 2000 is something that Greens, other parties, and independents face every election cycle throughout the U.S." 

http://www.gp.org/press/pr_07_14_04.html

The GPMI made a statement that I believe the GRP should emulate:

http://migreens.org/press/pr040712.htm

=======================================

I can well understand frustrations with the Nader campaign, and understand that Nader campaign ballot access in this state threatens our capacity to capture the golden 3%.

However, the technicalities on which Nader may be disqualified in this state are technicalities that- if met without protest- shall freely be used against us in the future. These technicalities are not being employed to protect us, but are rather being employed to maintain the Democratic Party stranglehold. Galvin's reliance on this gambit signals his party's intent to use these technicalities against ANY candidacy percieved as a threat to Democratic Party politicians. We can easier cope with our failure to make 3% than we could with attempts to disqualify thousands of signatures. If the Democrats can do that to the Nader campaign with little protest or fanfare, then just think about what they could do to state representative or senate candidates. Democracy happens to be what is truly at stake with this in Massachusetts. I don't think we can afford to be silent.

OB


----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Heichman <mikeh.massed at rcn.com>
Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 10:14:22 -0400
To: Green National Convention <gnc at green-rainbow.org>,<mrg-discuss at green-rainbow.org>
Subject: Re: [GNC] Re: Ballot Access

Re: I agree with Elie. Even though having Nader on the ballot will make it much
Re: more difficult for us to attain the 3% of the vote that we will need to
Re: maintain ballot access, I think that this is a matter of principle. I also
Re: believe that our action should be communicated to both the Cobb and Nader
Re: campaigns and to the national Green Party.
Re: 
Re: Mike Heichman