[statecom-discuss] Re: [candidate-development] vetting a proposal for the State Comm Meeting-request feedback

[Yarden]

I am not certain of just where to find a proposal submitted to To state 
comm,
So addressing my comments to you, I would like to find a serious way of 
mounting
a campaign against the electoral game model prevailing in one-party 
Massachusetts.

One of the difficulties of bringing about political change in 
Massachusetts is a theory
that local concerns are non-partisan in nature, differences are between 
conflicting 'interests,' that these are best resolved by compromise, 
and that good government is a problem of professional management 
methods. We can go into this at length but this may be neither the time 
or place (deTocqueville noticed this custom in 1830) for a full 
discussion of the consequences for political awareness at the national 
and state level, and how it influences a popular reliance on executive 
power that is exercised on behalf of powerful corporate greed.
"That's where the money to provide the jobs, tax base, and the facade 
of town and city government comes from, and all that is needed is a 
good city manager to convince the people we elect."

Hence my support for Mike's suggestion.  I suggest one alternation, a 
preamble, so that the Text would read:
Text:
Because many town and city governments in Massachusetts conduct local 
elections without listing political affiliation, denying the 
availability of information to the voter at the ballot box,
an important task for the GRP is to distinguish ourselves, making our 
vision the basis of our vote.  Therefore:

1.    As a condition of endorsement by the State GRP, candidates must 
publicly identify themselves as GRP members. Specifically, being a GRP 
member must be on their campaign literature. We ask that they do more 
(use our logo, put our website on their literature, etc.)
2.    As a condition of endorsement by the State GRP, candidates must 
agree that building the GRP is one of the goals of their campaigns.
3.    The State Party asks that local chapters establish similar 
policies for local endorsements.
>



On Sunday, November 4, 2007, at 04:33  PM, Mike Heichman wrote:

> Hi Members of CDLC:
>
> I have submitted this proposal for the 11-17 State Comm meeting.
>
> I request your feedback.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Mike Heichman
> mikeheichman at verizon.net
> 617-265-8143
>
> -------------------------------
> Expectations of GRP Endorsed Candidates
> BY Mike Heichman, Suffolk County
>
> Context:
>
> 1.    We often ask a lot from our GRP candidates.
> 2.    At this stage in our development, we are a small and resource 
> poor party. We often feel that we do not adequately support our 
> candidates despite our best intentions.
> 3.    We understand and appreciate that running as a GRP candidate is 
> an extra obstacle in being elected or re-elected.
> 4.    Some GRP endorsed candidates have run for political office 
> without adequately publicizing their membership in the GRP and without 
> building the GRP being one of the major goals of their campaigns.
>
> Text:
>
> 1.    As a condition of endorsement by the State GRP, candidates must 
> publicly identify themselves as GRP members. Specifically, being a GRP 
> member must be on their campaign literature. We ask that they do more 
> (use our logo, put our website on their literature, etc.)
> 2.    As a condition of endorsement by the State GRP, candidates must 
> agree that building the GRP is one of the goals of their campaigns.
> 3.    The State Party asks that local chapters establish similar 
> policies for local endorsements.
>
> _______________________________________________
> candidate-development mailing list
> candidate-development at green-rainbow.org
> http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/candidate-development
>