[statecom-discuss] Should statewide candidates have to support party platform and posiitons ?

[BillCunningham]

Hi Owen,

I don't think of this democratic centralism, which applies to all members of a party. The important thing is that the voters should feel that you are accountable to your platform.  It makes sense to me that means in general accountability to your party's platform. If there are any exceptions that should be made clear both in the election campaign and in the party's endorsement process.

These are among the things we need to work through in strategy discussions, I think....

-----Original Message-----
>From: Owen Broadhurst <owen.broadhurst at gmail.com>
>Sent: Aug 5, 2006 11:18 PM
>To: BillCunningham <etwee at earthlink.net>, Discussion List for StateCom members <statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org>
>Cc: gracegrnrnbw at aol.com
>Subject: Re: [statecom-discuss] Should statewide candidates have to support party platform and posiitons ?
>
>On 8/4/06, BillCunningham <etwee at earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>> Well, Owen raised the issue of gun control.
>
>
>Yes, I did.
>
>Where my one constituency remains the party, the party can expect me to
>support even positions I disagree with (for instance, IRV). Were I to find
>myself elected state representative, I would remain true to those values to
>which I have for many years subscribed - but the party would not in that
>instance be my sole and only representative. Were the party to find itself
>supporting, say, the bio-mass plant in Russell --  well, the party would
>find me bucking them. If I subscribed to democratic centralism, I would
>never have left the MIM or Solidarity.
>
>Owen R. Broadhurst
>
>
>
>On 8/4/06, BillCunningham <etwee at earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>> Well, Owen raised the issue of gun control.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> >From: gracegrnrnbw at aol.com
>> >Sent: Aug 4, 2006 3:51 PM
>> >To: etwee at earthlink.net, statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org
>> >Subject: Re: [statecom-discuss] Should statewide candidates have to
>> support party platform and posiitons ?
>> >
>> >We did all agree - is someone having a problem?  I think it is part of
>> >our endorsement process - Love, grace
>> >
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: etwee at earthlink.net
>> >To: statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org;
>> >statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org
>> >Sent: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 13:58:51 -0400 (EDT)
>> >Subject: Re: [statecom-discuss] Should statewide candidates have to
>> >support party platform and posiitons ?
>> >
>> >    If I were running for office with this party I would feel obliged to
>> >abide by
>> >the platform on all points.
>> >
>> >At the very least, before endorsement is given, a GRP candidate should
>> >be
>> >obliged to state every point on which she differed from the platform
>> >and would
>> >vote against the party's position if elected.
>> >
>> >Otherwise we do not really differ from the way the Big Two operate in
>> >this State
>> >except that we are much, much smaller.
>> >
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >>From: Owen Broadhurst <owen.broadhurst at gmail.com>
>> >>Sent: Aug 4, 2006 9:29 AM
>> >>To: Discussion List for StateCom members
>> ><statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org>
>> >>Subject: Re: [statecom-discuss] Should statewide candidates have to
>> >support
>> >party platform and posiitons ?
>> >>
>> >>We have never before required it, to my knowledge.
>> >>
>> >>We passed a seperate resolution requiring candidate support of equal
>> >>marriage rights, rather than platform subscription.
>> >>
>> >>It is a test that I personally would fail if I were to seek state-wide
>> >>office. I do not favor the handgun control portion of our party
>> >platform,
>> >>for instance, for many reasons (and I may well be in the running for
>> >the
>> >>endorsement of the Gun Owners Action League, having been highly rated
>> >on
>> >>their survey).
>> >>
>> >>I have never been in thorough support of the platforms of any given
>> >party.
>> >>This party boasts the one party platform I can voice general support
>> >for,
>> >>but there shall indubitably be one sentence or two within any given
>> >section
>> >>I could not support.
>> >>
>> >>A party that celebrates intellectual diversity cannot expect its
>> >candidates
>> >>in essence to become automatons robotically parroting every position
>> >the
>> >>party has adopted. We're in the business of trying to get human beings
>> >into
>> >>public office, human beings who recognize that although we do
>> >certainly all
>> >>subscribe to the Ten Key Values, we have wide diversity regarding how
>> >to
>> >>practice and express those values.
>> >>
>> >>Owen R. Broadhurst
>>
>>
>> --
>> Owen R. Broadhurst
>> Candidate for State Representative
>> Third Hampden District
>> http://www.owenbroadhurst.org


Bill Cunningham