[Membership] Proposal for State Comm: 2008 Elections

[Mike Heichman]

mikeheichman at verizon.net wrote:

>PLAN & PROPOSAL: “BUILDLING A STRONGER TEAM OF CANDIDATES/ELECTORAL
>CAMPAIGNS FOR THE 2008 
>ELECTIONS”
>
>For the State Committee’s April 14th Meeting & To Be Sent to the following
>Committees for Vetting  (CDLC, Platform, 
>Membership, ComCom, Tech, & Finance) and to the SPWG. 
>
>by Mike Heichman
>Interim Coordinator of CDLC
>mikeheichman at verizon.net
>617-265-8143
>
>March 13, 2007
>
>Earlier I had sent out to the CDLC an earlier draft and encouraged
>discussion and feedback. I want to thank Grace 
>Ross, Jamie O’Keefe and Ron Francis for sharing their ideas. Mentioning
>their names in no way implies their support 
>for my proposal.
>
>
>The best results of our effort will be to build on the vision and improve
>on our practice from our recent 2006 
>statewide slate of candidates. To be more effective, we can do the
>following:
>
>a.	Members of the State Committee can play a more active role by
>coordinating campaigns in their region.
>b.	The CDLC can provide the information, coordination and training for the
>candidates and their campaigns.
>c.	The Platform Committee can provide support by developing issue papers,
>providing research, etc.
>d.	ComCom can produce a public relations manual and a statewide newspaper,
>which can be produced and 
>distributed by the party on a regular basis.
>e.	The Tech Comm. can provide space on our website.
>f.	The Membership Comm. can strengthen the local base of our party by
>helping to build and strengthen our local 
>chapters and by identifying and involving other activists across the state.
>g.	The Finance Comm. can establish a separate “fund” to raise $ across the
>state for our candidates/campaigns?
>h.	What other parts of the state party did I forget to include in this
>proposal?
>  
>

I will send out 3 other messages which will provide the context to 
better understand this proposal.

>
>I. The Presidential Election of 2008
>
>1. The State Party has the responsibility to inform our members and, to the
>extent possible the general public, about 
>the Green Party’s 2008 campaign for the Presidency. 
>
>To accomplish this, we will do the following:
>
>a. The State Comm. requests that the ComCom keep our members informed about
>the Green Party’s campaign for 
>the presidency (through GRP newsletters and/or a new GRP newspaper from the
>middle of 2007 and up to the 
>November 2008 election).
>
>b. The State Comm. request that the Tech Committee set up a place on our
>website for this information and to 
>establish an e-mail discussion group. This should be done this year in the
>late spring or early summer.
>
>c. At this year’s annual convention, there should be time for information,
>discussion and time to deal with proposals.
>
>2. How will the GRP select our delegates to the Green Party’s Presidential
>Nominating Convention?
>
>The MA presidential primary will take place on March 4, 2008. Because of
>the success of our 2006 slate of statewide 
>candidates, it will be very simple process for us to place all the known
>Green Party candidates on the ballot. We will 
>contact all announced Green Party Presidential Candidates to solicit a
>letter requesting inclusion in our state primary 
>a month in advance. Our co-chairs will place all Green Party respondents on
>the ballot by contacting the Secretary of 
>State’s office by the deadline.
>
>For the 2004 campaign, the strength and resources of our state party in
>support of the presidential campaign was 
>small. Efforts to educate our members and the general public (some of them
>were eligible to take our ballot) were 
>inadequate for both the presidential primary and the November election.
>Thus, for many of our members and for 
>those who were eligible to take our ballot, they were unable to make an
>informed decision.
>
>Additionally, during the primary, there were problems at the polls. We
>believe that some of our members were not 
>able to get the GRP ballot in some of the precincts, and we doubt that the
>statewide results were accurately counted.
>
>Ideally the fairest and most democratic way to decide the distribution of
>our delegates for the national convention 
>would be by using the results of the primary. However, if we do not believe
>that we will be able to better solve the 2 
>problems described above, we should consider coming up with another process.
>
>I propose that we consider doing the following:
>
>a. The State Committee will adopt a plan to adequately educate our members
>and the general public about the Green 
>Party candidates who will be seeking the party’s nomination. On March 4,
>2008 our members should be able to 
>make an informed choice. At least two members of Adcom and/or the CDLC will
>meet with the Secretary of State’s 
>office to insure proper training of poll workers, insist on the same
>balloting procedures as the other ballot access 
>parties, expedite removal of GPUS and that the Secretary’s office work with
>the municipalities to correct previous and 
>ongoing incorrect party designation of GRP voters.
>
>b. If the State Committee believes that we will be unable to successfully
>deal with the above problems, we should 
>have a convention in addition to the primary. The convention, maybe 4-6
>weeks after the primary, would be the 
>place to evaluate the level of success of the primary and be empowered to
>make decisions about the composition of 
>the delegation.
>
>There are many problems with having a convention after the primary. Will a
>convention be perceived as being 
>democratic? What will be the turnout? What would happen if the turnout was
>small and there was an organized 
>attempt to pack the convention? Also, the work to organize for a convention
>could be better used on other projects.
>
>It is my hope that such a mechanism will not be needed. We have a
>responsibility to be proactive and take steps to 
>do what we can to make sure that our members make informed choices and that
>their votes will be accurately 
>counted. Will we be willing and able to take on these 
>responsibilities effectively?
>
>
>What should we do if our members are not inadequately informed (by the
>presidential candidates campaigning in our 
>state, by the state and by our party) when they vote in our primary next
>March? And what should we do if there are 
>problems with the vote and we can’t trust the count? I believe that we need
>to have a plan in place before the “game” 
>begins. It could become very divisive if we changed the rules for the
>selection of our delegates “the 
>day after” the primary.
>
>c. How can we choose a delegation that will be “faithful” to the decision
>of our members (voting in the MA primary) 
>that will be “faithful” to their candidates, and also be diverse?
>
>The State Comm. must adopt rules that will mandate the sending a diverse
>delegation to the Green Party’s national 
>convention. Appropriate proportional representation based on the primary
>vote (and if necessary, the convention 
>vote) will determine the number of delegates for each candidate and
>volunteers who can represent different 
>candidates will contact the candidates to be their designees for the
>national convention. If we decide not to have a 
>convention (and hopefully one will not be needed for the reasons already
>described), we will need some kind of 
>mechanism/meeting to democratically select the members of our diverse
>delegation.
>
>It is predictable that if our party leaves the decision of who should be
>the delegates to the national candidates that 
>this process will benefit our most privileged and active members. Our party
>needs to set up affirmative action rules 
>in the selection of our delegation. To the extent that we don’t, we will
>lack diversity. 
>
>
>
>d. The GRP Finance Committee will do some fundraising in order to make sure
>that attendance at the Green Party’s 
>national convention will not be an economic obstacle for any of our
>delegates.
>
>3. The 2007 GRP Convention will establish a “Diverse Presidential 2008
>Committee” to plan and implement our 
>support for our national ticket. This will be a subcommittee of CDLC and
>will need the support of other GRP 
>Committees.
>
>
>
>
>
>  
>