[statecom-discuss] 295 objection
jamie mclaughlin
experimental_radio at hotmail.com
Fri Jun 15 21:33:11 EDT 2007
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 10:46:39 -0400
From: Merelice <merelice at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [statecom-discuss] RE: : call for special meeting,
Hi,
Not sure how to interpret this: Is this the formal call for a meeting?
If not, are we waiting for prop 295 to be passed (and do we know when
that is scheduled)? If so, I suggest a clean copy be posted on the
StateCom official business list rather than the discuss list.
Merelice
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am never sure if the links i send out work,
1.here is the text of prop 295
2. an official objection filed by The green party from the state of GA to
prop 295 ( last night)
3. A new prop not on the NC voting block yet that will delay the
implementation of prop 272 until sept.
The re-apportionment process has been an ongoing debates for over 3 years
within the National Committee.
Implementation of prop 272 is in deep debate right now on the NC, many
people want the re-apportionment but do not think that it should be
implemented before the National meeting.
I have said that I do not think that it should be implemented before the
meeting because this years meeting is more expensive than last years
meeting. I believe in state fund raising but not for hotels that host
120.00$ a night ect...,
I am also concerned with implementing re-apportionment before the
convention because the DAC has not sent out their final numbers yet. That
means right now we have 8 delegates, however the DAC has said that it could
be 7 or 9 delegates with a slight chance of a change more drastic. I would
like to know the exact number of delegates we have to elect before the
election.
If #3. on this email passes the bbrp phase and then the NC vote, we
could vote on it and it would delay the implementation of re-apportionment
until September and we could hold our election at our state convention.
#2 in this email is an objection to 295 that needs 4 endorsements by
Sunday night and right now it has 3. Read it for yourself. see below
Why have this election? Well, many on the NC want to have one national
meeting before our presidential convention with re-apportionment in place.
There apportionment process has been on our voting block for over a year.
The DAC has not meant to prolong it to this national meeting, however we are
now here in June having this debate.
I really want to make this easy for state comm. There are so many
confusing arguments at the national level . They are hard for me to
understand. This is why I want more GRP members on the NC because I feel
like it is too much work for 2 people. There is a chance that
re-apportionment will be delayed until after the national meeting and it
could go into effect before the national meeting. This puts me in a very
difficult position because our state committee meeting has been delayed
until after the national meeting and I am getting mixed messages from
different people with mixed agendas. I would rather have an election at our
state convention. This process is taking up allot of my time and it feels
rather wasteful. I have called for a special meeting because apportionment
might go into effect sooner than later and I want the GRP to have a
delegation if that is the case.
I hope you can see my delema. Elie is away this weekend. I will keep
informed on the objection process.
please ask more questions and please try to be involved i this process
peace,
jamie McLaughlin, NC MA
1.
http://gp.org/cgi-bin/vote/propdetail?pid=295
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposal Details
Proposal ID 295
Proposal Delegate Allocation for GPUS National Committee
Presenter GPUS Apportionment Standing Committee
Floor Manager Holly Hart
Phase Discussion
Discussion 06/13/2007 - 06/26/2007
Voting 06/27/2007 - 07/03/2007
Presens Quorum 0.6666
Consens Quorum 0.6666 of Yes and No Votes
Background
Proposal 272, adopted by the GPUS National Committee on April 15, 2007,
states:
"The GPUS hereby creates the Apportionment Standing Committee to make
decisions regarding
the implementation of the above formula … The tasks laid out for the
committee include
the following:
1. Designing spreadsheets that perform the calculations of the formulas
described above
for delegate apportionment.
2. Soliciting the state parties to send the relevant data so that
apportionment can be
undertaken with the most complete data. (If a state party does not submit
numbers in a
timely fashion, the committee is empowered to use publicly available data or
to allocate
the delegate minimum to that state party until the next apportionment.)
3. Applying the criteria of this proposal to the data, plugging the most
accurate
available numbers into the formula, and completing the computations.
4. Developing a formal challenge process for data submitted by a state party
or to the
data entry or computational analysis, reviewing any such challenges, and
making the final
decision regarding the numbers to be used.
5. Reporting the results of apportionment to the NC in a timely fashion and
presenting
the proposal to approve the completed computations."
The Apportionment Standing Committee has carried out tasks 1-4 above, and is
presenting
the following proposal as its 5th task.
The Apportionment Standing Committee has also formally decided that the
challenge period
(see reference below to challenge process) will be the first ten days of the
discussion
period for this proposal. The committee will consider valid challenges as
friendly
amendments to the proposed numbers.
Proposal
Pursuant to Proposal 272, the GPUS National Committee approves the completed
computation
of delegate apportionment submitted by the GPUS Apportionment Standing
Committee:
State Number of votes
Alabama 2
Alaska 2
Arizona 2
Arkansas 2
California 42
Colorado 3
Connecticut 4
Delaware 2
District of Columbia 4
Florida 4
Georgia 2
Hawaii 2
Idaho 2
Illinois 10
Indiana 2
Iowa 2
Kansas 2
Louisiana 2
Maine 11
Maryland 4
Massachussetts 8
Michigan 6
Minnesota 3
Mississippi 2
Missouri 2
Montana 2
Nebraska 2
Nevada 2
New Jersey 4
New Mexico 2
New York 9
North Carolina 2
Ohio 3
Oklahoma 2
Oregon 7
Pennsylvania 8
Rhode Island 2
South Carolina 2
Tennessee 2
Texas 3
Utah 2
Vermont 2
Virginia 2
Washington 3
Wisconsin 7
Wyoming 2
Lavender Caucus 1
Black Caucus 1
Women's Caucus 1
TOTAL 200
CONTACTS
Aram Falsafi aram at aramfalsafi.com
Gary Novosielski gary at novosielski.com
Cat Woods, cat801 at mindspring.com
Resources
None
References
Proposal #272: Allocation of Delegates to the National Committee of the
Green Party
version 2:
http://gp.org/cgi-bin/vote/propdetail?pid=272
Challenge Process for Apportionment Standing Committee, adopted by the
committee on June
3, 2006:
http://lists.gp-us.org/pipermail/app-com/2007-June/000157.html
Spreadsheet showing the calculation used in coming up with the above
numbers:
http://www.seattlegreens.org/gpus-dac/index.html
Questions about this system?
Contact the Voting Admin.
The Green Party of the United States voting system is free software,
licensed under the GNU General Public License (GPL).
You can download a copy here.
To independently verify a ranked choice vote, or for information about how
that works, go to Jonathan Lundell's Voting Page and upload the ballot file
from the ranked choice vote result page. JL's ranked choice module is
licensed under an alternate free software license. Green Party of the United
States
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.
Pursuant to Proposal 266, I am writing to appeal from the
decision of the SC to place Proposal 295 in the voting
queue at this time and I ask other delegates to join me in
this objection.
Specifically:
1. Under the Rules and Procedures of GP-US, section 1,
POWERS OF STEERING COMMITTEE, paragraph 7 provides:
'7. Administer, using identical procedures, discussion and
votes on all GREEN PARTY-wide proposals submitted by
committees and member states.'
The SC has politicized this proposal by moving on it so
quickly [request less than 7 days] when a Georgia proposal
submitted May 16 - almost a month ago - has yet to hit the
Discussion list. The Georgia proposal was also posted to
the votes list and would have addressed at least one of the
following problems, also cited by NY Del. J. Nabewaniec.
The Georgia proposal has not been sent back for corrections
or revisions and appears to be in proper order according to
the proposal format. The handling of 295 is not pursuant to
identical procedures, discussion and votes.
2. The discussion period ends on Wednesday 6-27. But the
states are allowed up until June 24 to file their
information with the Apportionment Standing Committee
[ASC].
Proposal #272 requires of the ASC: "Developing a formal
challenge process for data submitted by a state party or to
the data entry or computational analysis,..."
In addition, the challenge procedure, issued by ASC fiat
would be moot, if voting proceeds without a time lapse from
the time of the last reports due in from states. Unless
the underlying substance of any challenge is to be moot,
states should have a time period *after* seeing the final
calculation to consider whether they want to file a
challenge or not, otherwise the challenge process is a
sham. For the record, some of the information on the
Georgia Green Party sent to us by the committee as their
assumptions is NOT correct. We just haven't decided whether
to challenge the information or not and we have until June
24 to make that decision to send correct information and or
challenge the award.
Perhaps this is true of other state parties. To even be
having formal discussion with the proposal in the voting
queue before the deadline for submission of information by
the state parties is at least premature and at worse a sham
of due process.
3. Further, Article III., of the Bylaws require that a
Committee:
"1) develop written rules, policies and procedure (RP&P)
documents which must be approved by the National Committee.
...
4) codify RP&Ps used to conduct general committee business
and, when appropriate, codify rules for decision making
via conference calls, email, and/or in-person meetings."
The fact that the challenge procedure was 'issued' with no
incorporation into the P & P and with no chance for the NC
to discuss, vote and approve violates this part of the
Bylaws.
4. The spreadsheet attached should be attached to the GP-US
voting website and, as of Thursday evening, it still is
not. Had the Georgia proposal referred to above been
adopted by now, it would have required the spreadsheet to
be so filed. Previous proposals' lack of documentation on
the web voting page was one of the reasons for Georgia
offering the missing proposal.
For these reasons, I object to the SC scheduling Proposal
295 for discussion and vote and ask that they delay it
until the later of 7 days following the close of the
submission procedure [July 1] or until any challenges have
been resolved to the effected parties' satisfaction. And I
ask other delegates to join me in this objection as soon as
possible.
Respectfully,
Al Herman, Del.
Georgia Green Party
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3.
This is in BRPP right now, it's an NC proposal to seat the new delegation 3
months after apporval so states can find out how many delegates they get
before picking who they are. and so everything changes at once. -jason
Proposal Details
Proposal ID 58
Proposal Delegate Reapportionment uniform implementation date, v2
Presenter Jason Nabewaniec of New York and Nan Garrett of Georgia
Floor Manager Hugh Esco
Phase Voting
Discussion 06/11/2007 - 06/13/2007
Voting 06/14/2007 - 06/17/2007
Presens Quorum 0.6666
Consens Quorum 0.6666 of Yes and No Votes
Background
none
Proposal
A Resolution to endorse for the favorable consideration of the National
Committee of the Green Party of the United States a resolution to amend the
provisions of Proposal #272, related to the "Allocation of Delegates to the
National Committee of the Green Party".
A Resolution of the
Committee on Bylaws, Rules, Policies and Procedures
of the Green Party of the United States
Resolved, that the Committee on Bylaws, Rules, Policies and Procedures
endorses for National Committee consideration, the adoption of the following
Amendments to the recently adopted Proposal #272, related to the "Allocation
of Delegates to the National Committee of the Green Party".
PRESENTER: Committee on Bylaws, Rules, Policies and Procedures of the Green
Party of the United States
CONTACT: Primary Presenter (Jason Nabewaniec, 321 Washington Ave #2, Batavia
NY, 585-219-4981, J_Nabs at hotmail.com)
SUBJECT: Delegate Re-apportionment Implementation Date
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:
In order to ensure that the delegate re-apportionment and future
re-apportionments adopted in 272 allows state parties an equal opportunity
to make the necessary adjustments to their delegations, this proposal
intends to set a timeframe for a uniform implementation date for new
apportionments of the Green National Committee.
FULL PROPOSAL:
A Proposal to amend Article I., of Proposal #272, related to "Allocation of
Delegates to the National Committee of the Green Party", to require the
adoption of Policies and Procedures for the Apportionment Standing
Committee, and to postpone the effective date of the adoption of any
recalculation until three months after the action to adopt.
A Resolution of the
Green National Committee of the
Green Party of the United States
Section 1.
The Rules related to the "Allocation of Delegates to the National Committee
of the Green Party", adopted April 15th, 2007, are amended by striking, in
its entirety, Article 1, which reads:
Article I. RECALCULATION
This apportionment will be recalculated every two years, in the odd numbered
year following the national election year by the Apportionment Standing
Committee (see Article VII). This committee shall start meeting between
election day in the even numbered year and the following March 4, shall put
out a call to state parties within two weeks requesting information
necessary for the apportionment calculation, and will present the results of
its recalculation to the National Committee by the end of the following May.
The results of each apportionment recalculation must be accepted by the
National Committee by a two thirds vote, and shall become effective at the
conclusion of the vote.
and by inserting in its place the following:
Article I. RECALCULATION
The apportionment of the Green National Committee shall be recalculated
every two years, in the odd numbered year following the Federal General
Election by the Apportionment Standing Committee (see Article VII). This
committee shall start meeting after the Federal General Election in each
even numbered year and not later than the following March 4. The Committee
shall publish a call to state parties within two weeks of its organization
requesting information necessary for the apportionment calculation. The
Committee shall present the results of its recalculation to the National
Committee by the end of the following May.
The initial recalculation shall be presented to the National Committee for
approval in a timely fashion after the Policies and Procedures for the new
Apportionment Standing Committee have been approved by the National
committee, but no later than two months after said approval.
The results of each apportionment recalculation must be accepted by the
National Committee by a two thirds vote, and shall become effective on the
first Tuesday following a three(3) month adjustment period begining with the
adoption of the calculation by the Green National Committee.
No recalculation shall be in order for consideration by the Green National
Committee until the adoption of Policies and Procedures to govern the work
of the Apportionment Standing Committee, which rules provide a process for
the resolution of appeals to the findings of the Apportionment Standing
Committee, including a process for appealing to the Green National Committee
an adverse decision by the Apportionment Standing Committee.
TIME LINE: ongoing
RESOURCES: none
REFERENCES: GNC Proposal 272 : http://gp.org/cgi-bin/vote/propdetail?pid=272
Resources
none
References
none
_________________________________________________________________
Get a preview of Live Earth, the hottest event this summer - only on MSN
http://liveearth.msn.com?source=msntaglineliveearthhm
More information about the statecom-discuss
mailing list