[statecom-discuss] Drafrt 2008 Public Policy Question Campaign

[Ron Francis]

I'm glad this discussion is taking place.

I believe that Mike is right that there is no such thing as a congressional district ballot question although I would love to see a campaign to develop one... but it would take a change to our constitution I believe.

I also believe that we are not in a position to do a statewide ballot question... but maybe if there was a commitment from single issue-like groups to participate but I don't see that happening.   it is possible that something could take off like wildfire but again I don't see that happening.  The number of signatures required for Statewide is just too high and lack of a passionate or local feel, I think, would tend to lessen interest

My proposal is to do a different question for each district where there are actually people interested in doing it and then linking the campaigns through a common literature piece so that people would get a sense of a common community with Key Values.  I would call it Key Values at the Ballot Box:

advantages would be that it doesn't diminish the compassion that people in the party have for different issues - a necessary ingredient especially for sustained activism by individuals.  For example, GRP's in Somerville who are passionate about Palestine, of which there are several, would be very willing to participate in this kind of a scheme.   The Southwestern MA fellow that I talked to about Marijuana would be game and I would'nt be surprised if chuck and other people wouldn't mind a marijuana question.  There are people interested passionately in other issues as well.  There are specific individuals who would like to do questions on NCLB, IRV, GM foods and the war.  How about one on Armenian Genocide in Watertown... (that made headlines and would be a great issue to show Armenians that the GRP is listening).

Another key advantage is that people will have a positive experience just getting on the ballot with their local question - a positive GRP experience that bodes well for future participation,  Regardless of the outcome, getting the question on the ballot - especially if it is a root cause question - feels great.

Disadvantages would be that there isn't that single identifying issue that people begin to associate with the party.

On solution would be to do both.   since it doesn't take a lot of work to collect signatures for the local ballot questions one could easily collect signatures on two questions.  One that everyone is encouraged to do and one that is different based on local interest... thus have our cake and eat it too.  I collected signatures in 2006 for two questions and literally 90% of people who signed one petition signed the other and did not seem particularly inconvenienced.

Of ways to unify issues, I think the proposal to talk about the war and human needs is as good a unifier as any.

Without the intention to do good follow-up after the campaigns then I think it is barely worth it to do the campaigns at all.   

We would do well to think about what our party looks like after these campaigns are over and try to assess if there are things that we can do during the campaigns to increase the likelihood of getting a sustained group to form after the issue is over (and this is where and think the passion and the local focus are necessary)

Sorry you guys are having so much snow !

Ron Francis

Mike Heichman <mikeheichman at verizon.net> wrote: Hi Grace,

Thank you for your thoughtful comments.

Reactions:

1. I don't believe that there is an advisory question for a 
congressional district. I just went to the Secretary of the 
Commonwealth's website and see no evidence. I will try to make a phone 
call and find out in the next couple of days. If you are right, your 
idea should be considered.

2. Local advisory questions would not be my favorite electoral option. 
However, if there are few or no candidates, it might be a way to help 
build the party (reasons already given).

3. If there is a ballot question that would substantially cut state 
taxes, which seems very likely, I hope that we will become involved in a 
coalition effort to defeat such a measure.

4. I do not believe that our party is in a strong enough position, 
especially at this late date, to be the lead organization to put a 
binding question on the statewide ballot. I'm not sure if you are 
suggesting this as an option.

5. I agree with your point about a weakness of my draft question is that 
it asks the legislature to take action on a national issue. New draft 
question:

“Shall the (senator or representative) from this district be instructed 
to vote in favor of legislation calling for the MA state legislature to 
appeal to our congressional delegation and ask it to support an 
immediate cut of (80%????) in spending for war and to transfer MOST OF 
those funds TO STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT 
AND  for human needs?"

6. Grace-I am submitting the above as a draft. Do you have another idea 
for a ballot initiative campaign?

Mike


Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com wrote:

>Mike - I think pursuing other avenues than running candidates is a good idea, 
>thanks for bringing this back into our committee structure and re-proposing 
>the idea.
>
>Local advisory votes I don't personally prefer.   I guess because you can do 
>public education without having to ensure a certain number of votes - maybe 
>linked ot a powerful voter education/registration drive in low-turn-out 
>communities would make it worth it - if we are just talking to the usual voters that 
>everyone reaches - that is not so interesting.
>
>But the most problematic issue with this question is that you have put a 
>nationally advisory question directed at state legislators?????????   If you have 
>a national election going on, why not focus the question on Congressional 
>districts - who actually make these decisions - and in that case wouldn'tit make 
>more sense to research the demand we want and go meet with each of them first 
>to see where they stand on it?
>
>Equally important is that there may well be a ballot question attempting to 
>eliminate income tax - moving us ever more regressively on taxation, crippling 
>what is left of our state economy, and hurting those the most (both in terms 
>of shifted tax burden and cuts in services) who can least afford it.
>
>If we are going to mount a statewide ballot campaign, what about actually 
>doing organizing and voter registration with a broad-based message that really 
>empowers people around taxes and voting (using their initiative as the target)?  
> And reaches the people no one else is willing to take the time to reach?
>
>Love, grace
>In a message dated 12/16/07 3:47:07 PM, mikeheichman at verizon.net writes:
>
>
>  
>
>>Mike Heichman wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Hi CDLC, State Comm and SPWG
>>>
>>>I ask for your consideration and feedback.
>>>
>>>Mike Heichman
>>>
>>>
>>>DRAFT 2008 PUBLIC POLICY QUESTION CAMPAIGN
>>>
>>>Mike Heichman
>>>12-16-07
>>>
>>>
>>>Background:
>>>
>>>Earlier this year Ron Francis had initiated an exploration to see if
>>>there were interest from GRP members across the state to see whether
>>>or not we could find an agreement on one state legislative advisory
>>>question for the 2008 elections. It was his thinking that this would
>>>be a good way to identify the party with an issue across the state
>>>while building the party at the local level.
>>>
>>>I have always thought that Ron’s proposal was a good one that deserved
>>>pursuing. Earlier this month Ron sent me a message about his campaign.
>>>He told me that 8 GRP members had attended meetings and they had
>>>explored 2 separate questions (reparations and IRV). Additionally he
>>>informed me that there was someone from Southeastern MA who was
>>>interested in a marijuana ballot question.
>>>
>>>Recently Ron moved out of the state. While he was not optimistic that
>>>we would succeed in uniting behind one issue this year, I have decided
>>>to pursue it to see if there is interest in this project for 2008.
>>>
>>>As of this date, it is clear that we will be involved in a
>>>presidential campaign for 2008. However, at this point in time, it is
>>>unclear how many, if any, GRP members will be running for office next
>>>year. We may have a situation where we have many candidates for
>>>Congress and for the state legislature. If that is the case, this idea
>>>would be a diversion of attention and resources, and I would suggest
>>>that we not pursue this campaign.
>>>
>>>However, I believe that a more likely scenario would be that we would
>>>have only a few GRP candidates running across the state. Where we
>>>would have a candidate, our local members would have the option of
>>>choosing to participate in this project. Where there would be no
>>>candidates, this project could be the idea that motivates GRP to
>>>organize locally.
>>>
>>>
>>>Research:
>>>
>>>The Secretary of the Commonwealth had produced a document for the
>>>“2006 Public Policy Question Petitions”. (You can get it from their
>>>website: http://www.sec.state.ma.us/ELE/eleidx.htm and in the right
>>>column, download the pdf, “How to Place a Public Policy Question on
>>>the 2006 State Election Ballot). I am confident that they will soon
>>>create an updated document for the 2008 elections. In the meantime,
>>>there is sufficient information to plan our 2008 campaign. We would
>>>not be able to begin collecting signatures until mid-April and would
>>>have until early July to gather the signatures. We would need 1200
>>>valid signatures from any registered voter for a state senatorial
>>>district and only 200 for a state representative district.
>>>
>>>According to the document, “Generally, public policy questions involve
>>>a determination of what governmental action is desirable or necessary
>>>for the public interest. The question must be fit for legislative
>>>action. It must provide a legislator with an instruction or direction
>>>regarding governmental action.”
>>>
>>>The following format should be used, “Shall the (senator or
>>>representative) from this district be instructed to vote in favor of
>>>legislation (describe the legislation you wish to be enacted)?”
>>>
>>>Why One Question:
>>>
>>>I believe that there are a few major advantages of uniting behind one
>>>question:
>>>
>>>For each question, a separate campaign committee would have to be
>>>created. Each would have to have a Treasurer and file campaign finance
>>>reports. It would be much easier to organize one statewide campaign. I
>>>believe that it would be easier to raise finances for one project. By
>>>focusing our limited resources on one question we will be in better
>>>shape to organize a major campaign.
>>>
>>>My Draft Question: (I encourage others to either improve this draft or
>>>submit their own ideas for a ballot question.)
>>>
>>>“Shall the (senator or representative) from this district be
>>>instructed to vote in favor of legislation calling for the MA state
>>>legislature to appeal to our congressional delegation and ask it to
>>>support an immediate cut of (80%????) in spending for war and to
>>>transfer those funds for human needs?
>>>
>>>This is my very brief initial idea. The GRP would need to have a
>>>discussion about how major a cut we would be seeking. It is essential
>>>that we select a figure that would make it clear that we are offering
>>>something to the public that is substantially different than what has
>>>been discussed before by the duopoly. We should also substitute a
>>>relatively small list instead of my vague call for “human needs”.
>>>
>>>Timeline:
>>>
>>>December-January 27:
>>>
>>>1. We will discussion this proposal with the hope of coming up with a
>>>plan and a timetable to submit for the January 27 Sate Comm. Meeting.
>>>This idea should be discussed by our local chapters, the State
>>>Committee, SPWG, CDLC as well as other e-mail lists.
>>>2. By January 27, it should be much clearer how many other electoral
>>>races the party will be pursuing, which will help provide the context
>>>for the State Comm’s decision.
>>>
>>>If passed by the January 27 State Comm. Meeting:
>>>
>>>February-Early April:
>>>
>>>1. Set up an initial statewide campaign committee.
>>>2. Publicize and organize GRP members.
>>>3. Outreach to progressive groups (at a statewide and regional
>>>levels). Invite those who will endorse and work on our initiative to
>>>join our statewide campaign committee.
>>>4. Do similar organizing at the local level. The goal will be to
>>>create an “organizing committee” for every district that we will be
>>>seeking to put this on the ballot. (In some cases, it might make more
>>>sense to have a larger committee. For example, if we were to get this
>>>question on the ballot in a number of districts in Boston, we could
>>>have one citywide organizing committee.)
>>>5. Creation of “statewide” campaign literature with room for local
>>>contacts.
>>>6. Fundraising at the state and local level.
>>>
>>>Mid-April-Early July:
>>>
>>>1. Gathering of Signatures and conducting of the campaign in the local
>>>districts
>>>2. Building of district campaign organizations
>>>3. Continued fundraising
>>>
>>>July-Election Day:
>>>
>>>1. Intensive outreach to the community
>>>2. Discussion of future work (building and strengthening of local
>>>chapters; coalition work)
>>>3. Fundraising
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>statecom-discuss mailing list
>>statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org
>>http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom-discuss
>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>
>
>**************************************
>See AOL's top rated recipes 
>(http://food.aol.com/top-rated-recipes?NCID=aoltop00030000000004)
>_______________________________________________
>statecom-discuss mailing list
>statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org
>http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom-discuss
>  
>

_______________________________________________
statecom-discuss mailing list
statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org
http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom-discuss