[statecom-discuss] Fwd: [usgp-nc] Discussion Has Begun on GP-US Proposal: ID 324 - Delegate Apportionment for the GPUS Presidential Nominating Convention

[Yarden]

To all concerned:
The following proposal, GP-US Proposal: ID 324 - Delegate Apportionment 
for the GPUS Presidential Nominating Convention has been submitted for 
discussion by the NC.  As noted below, discussion has begun as of 
today, and is scheduled to continue until November 11, 2007. Should any 
committee, local, or individuals within the party wish to prepare 
submission of a proposal to the State Committee (according to our 
rules) on this subject, there is plenty of time to do so, since the 
voting on the proposal in the NC closes after the next StateCom 
meeting. Organizationally speaking, this timing offers us a serious 
opportunity to instruct the NC delegation of the GRP in direct 
conference.

I have yet to read the proposal carefully, but please take note of the 
following, and act accordingly, in communicating with members of our NC 
delegation.

"The GP-US strives for consensus, which involves several steps, taken 
in order..
Clarifying questions and responses from the group making the proposal.
Airing of concerns and discussion about how to improve the proposal by 
taking into
consideration those concerns.
Call for consensus on the final proposal."


Elie Yarden
delegate NCMA GRP


Begin forwarded message:

> From: voting at gpus.org
> Date: Sun Oct 28, 2007  11:05:02 PM US/Eastern
> To: natlcomvotes at green.gpus.org
> Subject: [usgp-nc] Discussion Has Begun on GP-US Proposal: ID 324 - 
> Delegate Apportionment for the GPUS Presidential Nominating Convention
> Reply-To: natlcomvotes at green.gpus.org
>
> Discussion has begun for the following proposal:
>
> Proposal ID: 324
> Proposal: Delegate Apportionment for the GPUS Presidential Nominating 
> Convention
> Floor Manager: Jason Nabewaniec, j_nabs at hotmail.com
> Discussion Dates: 10/29/2007 - 11/11/2007
> Voting Dates: 11/12/2007 - 11/18/2007
>
> Voting ends at Midnight Pacific Time
>
> The GP-US strives for consensus, which involves several steps,
>  taken in order..
>
> Clarifying questions and responses from the group making the proposal.
> Airing of concerns and discussion about how to improve the proposal
> by taking into consideration those concersn
> Call for consensus on the final proposal.
>
> Background: The Delegate Apportionment Committee (DAC) was elected
> pursuant to Green Party of the United States (GPUS) proposal
> 175, worked for 10 months discussing and negotiating
> apportionment issues, achieved consensus, accepted
> amendments, and proposed a new delegate apportionment
> formula in the form of proposal 256. This proposal needed
> 66.7% approval to pass; proposal 256 received 65% approval.
> The DAC had been charged with proposing apportionment in
> general, including the Presidential nominating convention;
> after their consensus proposal failed, members ceased work
> on proposals.
>
> GPUS proposal 272, a revision of the proposal 256, was then
> sponsored by several states, adopted as a formula on April
> 16, 2007 and implemented on July 4, 2007 with 73% approval.
> Since the DAC had intended to propose a model for the
> convention apportionment similar in structure to that
> proposed in 256, and since several of the people who opposed
> proposal 256 and 272 said that they thought that such a
> performance-based menu-option model was suitable for the
> convention apportionment, this model is being proposed for
> convention apportionment.
>
> The current proposal was developed, with minor amendments,
> from a proposal for convention apportionment approved by all
> the members of the original DAC who remained to the end of
> the committee's work.
>
> Proposal: This proposal presents a formula to be used to calculate
> delegate apportionment for GPUS Presidential nominating
> conventions, starting with the 2008 convention and until
> such time another proposal is proposed and adopted.
>
> The new Delegate Apportionment Committee to be elected in
> 2010, pursuant to proposal 272, shall revisit issues of
> proportionate representation in the GPUS national
> Presidential nominating convention in light of experience
> with this formula and make a new proposal for delegate
> apportionment to the 2012 national convention in 2011. If
> that proposal is not adopted, this formula shall continue to
> be in effect.
>
> ALLOCATION OF DELEGATES TO THE GPUS PRESIDENTIAL NOMINATING
> CONVENTION
>
> ARTICLE I. CALCULATION - The apportionment for the national
> nominating convention will be calculated every four years,
> in the odd numbered year preceding the national election
> year by the Apportionment Standing Committee. Pursuant to
> proposal 272, this committee will have collected the
> necessary information from state parties to calculate the
> National Committee apportionment. The Apportionment Standing
> Committee shall use this same data to calculate the
> apportionment for the Presidential nominating convention.
> The Apportionment Standing Committee shall consider possible
> corrections to the data since the previous calculation.
> Should there be any ambiguities in the application of the
> calculation method, the committee shall rule on these
> according to its internal challenge process and standards.
> The results of such rulings shall be reported on its
> publicly accessible listserv.
>
> The Apportionment Standing Committee shall present the
> results of its calculation of the 2008 convention as soon as
> possible, and no longer than two months following the
> adoption of this proposal. It shall present the results of
> recalculations to the National Committee by November of the
> year preceding the Presidential election year. The results
> of the apportionment recalculation must again be approved by
> the National Committee by a simple majority vote, and shall
> become effective for the following Presidential nominating
> convention.
>
> ARTICLE II. DELEGATES AND VOTES -Each delegate seat counts
> for one vote. To compensate for the expense, difficulty and
> environmental burden of travel to the convention, proxy
> votes are allowed, under the following rules:
>
> 1. The number of proxy votes per delegation may not exceed
> the number of seated delegates on that delegation.
>
> 2. Delegations may cast any allowed proxy votes by
> consulting their constituent body or consulting a specific
> delegate whose proxy is held.
>
> 3. Delegations with at least four voting members also have
> the option of casting the proxy votes proportionally to the
> votes of the seated delegates as a whole.
>
> 4. In delegations where individual seated delegates carry
> proxy votes, no seated delegate may cast more than one proxy
> vote.
>
> ARTICLE III. SIZE OF THE GPUS PRESIDENTIAL NOMINATING
> CONVENTION - The Presidential nominating convention shall
> consist of 800 ±5 delegates when all accredited state
> parties and caucuses are included. Should any new state
> party or caucus become accredited after an apportionment,
> the convention will be expanded by the number of delegates
> allotted to the newly entering member party or caucus.
>
> ARTICLE IV. MINIMUM VOTE - All accredited state parties are
> entitled to a minimum of five votes and five delegates.
>
> Accredited caucuses are guaranteed three votes. Any
> GPUS-accredited caucus of a diversity group that is
> under-represented on the National Committee by a factor of 2
> to 1 or greater, relative to the general population, shall
> be apportioned five votes.
>
> ARTICLE V. PROPORTIONAL ALLOCATION METHOD - Using the data
> collected from each state party, the Apportionment Standing
> Committee will determine the proportion of delegates
> allocated to each state party to the national convention
> using four measures of relative Green Party strength. These
> measures are based on estimating each state party's active
> contribution to the Green Party in terms of campaign
> strength, in-state voting strength, Presidential voting
> strength, and number of members.
>
> Within most of these categories, there are multiple methods
> of determining the strength of a state party relative to
> parties in other states. The state may choose which method
> in each category to use. If the state does not choose, the
> Apportionment Standing Committee will use the method in each
> category that gives each state party its highest possible
> score. The final score is given in terms of a percentage of
> the national Presidential nominating convention.
>
> The formula for calculating the number of delegates
> allocated to a given state party is as follows:
>
> 1. Using the choices of the state party, calculate the score
> in each of the four categories. Normalize each category so
> that the total percentage is 100%.
>
> 2. Add up these scores and divide by 4 to get an average
> score. This is the percentage of the delegation designated
> to the state.
>
> 3. If the percentage is less than the minimum percentage
> threshold of delegates allocated to each state, then five
> delegates will be allocated to that state party. The minimum
> percentage threshold is
> {5 /[800 - (number of delegates apportioned to accredited
> caucuses)]} x 100%.
>
> 4. If the percentage is greater than the minimum threshold,
> that is the initial percentage of delegates allocated to the
> state party.
>
> Once the initial percentages are calculated for all
> accredited parties, these values must be normalized to
> assure that the total percent of delegates equals 100%. The
> formula for normalizing the initial percentages is as
> follows:
>
> 5. Set all states with initial percentage scores below the
> minimum threshold value equal to the minimum threshold.
>
> 6. Add up the initial percentage scores of all states and
> divide each state's initial percentage by this total.
>
> 7. Repeat steps 5. and 6. until the total percentage of
> delegates allotted to all states (800 - number of delegates
> apportioned to accredited caucuses) equals approximately
> 100% (will usually take 3 to 4 iterations),
>
> The number of delegates allocated to each state is
> calculated by multiplying the normalized percentage of each
> state by [800 - (number of delegates apportioned to
> accredited caucuses)] and rounding off to the nearest
> integer.
>
> 8. The threshold for rounding may need to be adjusted in
> order to bring the total number of delegates within the
> range of ±5 of the target number.
>
>
> ARTICLE VI. ALLOCATION MEASURES
>
> The Apportionment Standing Committee will seek submissions
> of data from state Green Party organizations according to
> the following criteria:
>
> 1. Membership
> The number of Green Party members in the state party as
> close as possible to the date of the start of the work of
> the committee. (This will then be calculated as a percentage
> of the total number of Green Party members in the United
> States.)
>
> Green Party membership is defined as follows:
>
> * In states where the Green Party can register voters, Green
> Party membership is defined as the number of voters that are
> registered in the Green Party. Green Party membership in
> these states may also include those who are ineligible to
> vote but are extended formal membership by the state party.
>
> * In states without Green Party voter registration, Green
> Party membership is defined as the number of people who have
> filled the qualifications for membership in that state
> party, have signed up to be Green Party members, and are
> included in the database of current members in that state
> party. Calculations and email lists may not be substituted
> for membership rolls. State parties without partisan
> registration that have Green Party primaries may use the
> number of voters who received Green Party primary ballots as
> a back up measure for membership.
>
> Solely for the purposes of standardizing this apportionment
> measure between states, after voting in a primary of another
> political party, Green Party members should re-affirm their
> Green Party membership with their state party. This may be
> handled on the honor system and does not require a
> significant extra administrative burden for the state party.
> The state party is free to count its own membership however
> it wants for other purposes; this recommendation is solely
> for reporting this particular measure to the Apportionment
> Committee in a manner that makes the numbers as comparable
> as possible.
>
> If state legal action results in a state Green party having
> its members legally invalidated, they may continue to use
> the same membership count until the next apportionment
> cycle.
>
> NOTE: For the purposes of #2, Campaign Strength, and #3,
> State Voting Strength, "Green Party Office Holders" and
> "Green Party Candidates" must be Green Party members. They
> may not also be members of the Republican or Democratic
> Party or running solely on another political party's ballot
> line. For State Voting Strength, if a candidate is listed on
> more than one party's ballot line, only the votes for the
> Green Party ballot line can be counted.
>
>
> 2. Campaign Strength
> A. The number of Green Party Office Holders in your state as
> a percentage of the total number of Green Party Office
> Holders in all affiliated state parties. Green Party office
> holders are defined as members of the Green Party who are
> elected to public office in elections (not including
> internal party offices such as central committees). If they
> received less than 50 votes to win the office, they will
> count half.
>
> B. The number of local and statewide Green Party Candidates
> that ran for office in your state during the last four-year
> election cycle as a percentage of the total number of local
> and statewide Green Party Candidates that ran for office in
> the U.S. in all affiliated state parties during the same
> period. Local or statewide Green Party Candidates are
> defined as Green Party members who run and appear on the
> ballot in public elections. If they received less than 50
> votes, they will count half.
>
> C. The percentage of the total U.S. population that resides
> in your state, multiplied by 0.5. This measure is designed
> to compensate for overly restrictive ballot access laws in
> some states. States are only eligible to use this measure if
> they do not have ballot access and make a claim that ballot
> access laws are overly restrictive in their state; states
> with ballot access may not use this measure for this
> category. If used here, population may not be used in #3,
> State Voting Strength or in #4, Presidential Voting
> Strength.
>
> D. As another option to compensate for overly restrictive
> ballot access laws, states may choose to repeat the
> Membership measure (Article VI, Section 1, above) in this
> category. States are only eligible to use this measure if
> they do not have ballot access and make a claim that ballot
> access laws are overly restrictive in their state; states
> with ballot access may not use this measure for this
> category.
>
> 3. State Voting Strength
> A. The number of votes cast for Green Party Candidates in
> your state during the last four-year election cycle as a
> percentage of the total number of votes cast for Green Party
> Candidates in the U.S during the same time. State parties
> may use the number of signers of state party ballot access
> petitions as equivalent to votes cast.
>
> B. The highest number of votes received by a single Green
> Party Candidate in your state during the last four-year
> election cycle as a percentage of the total number of Green
> Party votes received by the highest vote getter in each
> state in the U.S. during the same time. State parties may
> use the number of signers of state party ballot access
> petitions as equivalent to votes cast.
>
> C. The highest vote percentage received by a Green Party
> candidate in your state during the last four years in a
> statewide partisan election for Governor, Lt. Governor or
> U.S. Senate (or Mayor or Chair of the City Council for the
> District of Columbia) that is contested by both major
> political parties, weighted against the same data from every
> affiliated state Green Party. Because this measure, unlike
> all the others, is a percentage of a percentage, its effect
> shall be capped at a maximum of five extra delegates.
>
> D. The percentage of the total U.S. population that resides
> in your state, multiplied by 0.5. This measure is designed
> to compensate for overly restrictive ballot access laws in
> some states. If used here, population may not be used in #2,
> Campaign Strength or in #4, Presidential Voting Strength.
> States are only eligible to use this measure if they do not
> have ballot access and make a claim that ballot access laws
> are overly restrictive in their state; states with ballot
> access may not use this measure for this category.
>
> E. As another option to compensate for overly restrictive
> ballot access laws, states may choose to repeat the
> Membership measure (Article VI, Section 1, above) in this
> category. States are only eligible to use this measure if
> they do not have ballot access and make a claim that ballot
> access laws are overly restrictive in their state; states
> with ballot access may not use this measure for this
> category.
>
> 4. Presidential Voting Strength
> A. The number of votes cast for Green Party presidential
> nominee in your state in the November 2000 general election
> as a percentage of the number of votes cast for the same
> candidate nationwide.
>
> B. The number of votes cast for Green Party presidential
> nominee in your state in the November 2004 general election
> as a percentage of the number of votes cast for the same
> candidate nationwide.
>
> C. The percentage of the total U.S. population that resides
> in your state, multiplied by 0.5. (This measure is designed
> to compensate for overly restrictive ballot access laws in
> some states. If used here, population may not be used in #2,
>  Campaign Strength or in #3, State Voting Strength.)
>
> D. As another option to compensate for overly restrictive
> ballot access laws, states may choose to repeat the
> Membership measure (Article VI, Section 1, above) in this
> category.
>
> Resources: CONTACTS:
> Cat Woods, cat801 at mindspring.com, 415-897-6989
> Aram Falsafi, aram at aramfalsafi.com, 206-723-6827
>
> References:
>
> Full details are available at:
>
> http://gp.org/cgi-bin/vote/propdetail?pid=324
>
> Please send your comments to natlcomvotes at green.gpus.org.
>
> Thank you and have a wonderful day!
> --The GP-US Voting Admin
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Natlcomvotes mailing list
> To send a message to the list, write to:
> Natlcomvotes at green.gpus.org
> To unsubscribe or change your list options, go to:
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/natlcomvotes
>
> If your state delegation changes, please see:
> http://gp.org/committees/nc/documents/delegate_change.html
>
> To report violations of listserv protocol, write to 
> forummanagers at lists.gp-us.org
>
> For other information about the Coordinating Committee, see:
> http://gp.org/committees/nc/