[statecom] Proposal for Local Ballot 2008 Exploration Comm. - need co-sponsor

Tue Jan 9 18:47:40 EST 2007

CAPS for emphasis below... not yellin'  !

  A few points:

  1) On municipal vs state rep ballot questions:
  Muncipal ballot question in cities are very difficult to do in cities, but easy to do in towns.  (The threshold for cities is higher than any other type of ballot in the state 10% unless the local municipal body put the question on the ballot ... and they won't if it addresses a root cause of poverty.  In Somerville we needed 4200 sigs in 2005 and it we collected 6,500.  It didn't matter because the city rejected the language and format and a judge did not back us up with an injunction to force the city... the court case continues....).  Also the question doesn't bind the municipality to do anything as they are questions are nonbinding by law.  It may be the case that some cities have less stringent rules (The default is 10 % if a city has nothing....)

  Towns are easier and the suggestion to do town questions has merit... and they are also binding on the town:

  from Sec. of State Website:
  "May voters call a special Town Meeting?
  Yes, voters may call a special Town Meeting. Two hundred registered voters or 20% of the total number of registered voters, whichever is less in number, may request a special Town Meeting. The special Town Meeting must be held no later than 45 days after the Board of Selectmen receive the request."

  State Rep ballot questions have the same 200 sig requirement and instruct the State Rep to take action. 

  I would accept an amendment to consider special town meetings in 2007 as well if someone wants to do that.  Note teh special town meetings can come at anytime of the year including late 2007 ... so it gives time to organize.

  2) Do people care about Palestine ?
  They do and they do a lot !  Last Friday night, of all nights, I attended a talk in Andover where I teach and 250 residents attended a talk called by the highschool principal to discuss the issue.  100 zionists, 100 justice workers and about 60 students.

  I sympathize with the seemingly reasonable assertion that a Palestine question is not something that local folks care about but I think the question of "caring about an issue" is an interactive process.  When people find out about Palestine they become very interested and involved.   Palestine is easy to interest people in, compared to say Colombia, because the US involvement in Palestine is linked to the supposed "war on 'terrorism' ".  So poeple do care about Iraq, Al Qaeda, Palestine, Iran etc....   people realize that these issues are affecting our country's security and pocket book.  Even President Carter recently said that the main cause of antipathy toward the US is our pro-apartheid policy.   (use THAT in a leaflet !).  Some folks are not as concerned about "bread and butter" issues as one might think.

  I hadn't considered the possibility of a series of local ballot questions on Palestine so I thank whoever raised it.  I will think about it.  Aid to Israel couples very nicely with anti-poverty and also resonates with MLK's call to fight militarism and racism as core problems.

  3) On the point of my proposal
  It is basically correct that I am looking for an exploratory committee because I think the strategy that I have laid out for growing the GRP is good but needs a dedicated committee to get it going. 

  I don't like a lot of Committees !, and in fact I still think we should consolidate committees which I will propose at the Spring Staecom.   Yet I also beleive that we critically need more DIRECT local organizing and I think that a committee dedicated to one very crucial mode of DIRECT local organizing (ballot questions) is at the same rank as the CDLC if not higher.   A Ballot Question Development Committee if you will.

  Anyway, part of the reason for my proposal is to get folks thinking strategically for the long-term.  I think my proposal solves two of our problems simultaneously: 1) need for DIRECT local organizing, 2) Need for the perty to be identified with a passionate cause that has a root-cause analysis along with it.   

  I have not seen another proposal that deals with these two problems in such a direct fashion although I'm all ears.  In fact I issue a friendly challenge to anyone to offer a better long-term strategic plan thorugh 2010 that addresses these two key concerns...  Go for it !

  finally, I do think that the proposal mentioned by merelice that encompasses this proposal in her opinion is true basically, .... but I think it goes further because it suggest a specific modality for a "program of issues and actions that will focus", and it's ONE modality so that we have more focus and more party identification rather than a disparate set of actions such as Marches, Legislation, Demostrations, Education campaings etc...

  There is something nice and clean about having the same language for all munciplatities if people can get behind it,... that lends more coherence than a set of disparate programs and actions.

  4) On why do this ballot proposal since single payer and clean elections folks have been doing this for a decade...

  The point is that this local ballot prposal is a vehicle for us to advance our party as a force in representative governemnt.

  I'm not saying to abandon our "reason for being" as a political party, but rather to use local ballot question to get to the point where we can have stronger candidates.

  This proposal does three things a) exposes the DEMS - this is critical, b) identifies us with a single (or maybe two) passinate issues and c) forces us to do more DIRECT local organizing.  

  The local ballot vehicle advances our "reason for being"

  5) On whether abolishing poverty is on the minds of most voters.

  It depends on where the voters are located.

  In some municipalities the issue of poverty adn related ills is a high priority.

  I do sympathize however with the observation that other issues are also on people's minds and thus the reference to foreign policy issue (Iraq, Paestine) mentined above.

  Also, folks with a high likelihood of being interested in GRP without much prodding would certainly include folks that are concerned about poverty issues and this also includes a disproportionate fraction of people of color.

  Finally I think that the question of whether people are interested in a ballot question on anti-poverty depends on the actual language of the question.  If we can put forth a question that addresses root causes and exposes the DEMS (critical) then I think it will mount interest... kn dof like the right of return ballot questin in Somerville (some folks from other cities are now interested in Return ballot questions....)

  ron

John Walsh <jvwalshmd at gmail.com> wrote:
  I am afraid that I do not get this ballot initiative proposal. First
of all the single-payer community and the clean elections people did
this, the former for decades.
Ultimately we have a representative form of government, and the Greens
are the only vehicle to allow democratic change via that form of
government. Referenda can be pursued without an electoral party. Why
would we do this? It is a failed tactic and it runs counter to our
very reason for being.
Secondly, I do not believe that abolishing poverty, admirable as that
goal is, is something on the minds of most voters. Do we not have to
meet people where they are applying our principles to their main
concerns? Or do we know better? Arrogance in politics seems like a
sure loser.
jw
p.s. Please forward to the Discussion List since I do not have access.

On 1/9/07, gary hicks wrote:
> all:
> was it dr. king or someone else who, when advised by a well-wisher that now is not the time to go public on some issue or other, handed that well wisher a blank sheet of paper and asked for a good date as to when?
>
> gh
>
> Ron Francis wrote:
> Dear All,
>
> I wasn't suggesting a ballot question on Palestine although I will consider it below now that it has been raised.
>
> What I was doing is showing how the characteristics of a Palestine ballot question allow the GRP to distinguish itself clearly ... and that's because it strikes straight to the core of the Democrats complicity with elites.
>
> But since you mentioned it !,... I will say that doing a foriegn policy issue next to the poverty related issue that I proposed could be acceptable and Palestine would be a good candidate.
>
> Advantages would be that the issue is on people's minds and support for human rights is high in general.
>
> The main disavantage would be that it would have us identified with two issues which I am not sure that we really want to do.... but I will consider it in my thinking.. .maybe a two issue identification is acceptable....it's tough to guage since there isn't much historical data on this modality.
>
> I disagree that Palestine is a divisive issue. It's the Democrats in Somerville and elsewhere who kept saying "Palestine is divisive". What they really meant is that they wanted to shield zionists inside of progressive circles from stinging criticism from the "left" (social justice workers).
>
> But anyway, what is wrong with divisive issues ? Gay marriage is a "divisive" issue, and it's a great issue for us to take up.
>
> You said "But it is politically divisive and could be a waste of time for a state political party at best, or a disaster at worst. What's the goal here? To show the public that we can stick our finger in the eye of zionism"
>
> The answer to your question is yes. The goal is to show that the GRP is a party that is anti-racist (anti-zionists) and draw support from that as was done in Somerville. Keep in mind that the entire political establishment was against the Somerville Ballot Questions and we still did incredibly well getting 50% in my home precinct on one question.
>
> I don't understand why you think the liberation of Palestine is a waste of time for a State Political Party. Our State currently invest 100's of millions of dollars in companies that are invested in killing Palestinians. It would not be a "waste of time" for a progressive State Party to try to put an end to the State's complicity that.
>
> In the 80's the State of Massahusetts took out economic sanctions against South Africa. It was an effort led by Byron Rushing and Mel King.
>
> There would be nothing wrong with the GRP taking a lead on pushing for the eventual sanctions on aparthied Israel. (Thanks Jimmy Carter !)
>
> Ron Francis
>
>
> Adam Sacks wrote: Dear Ron and All -
>
> I think that a coordinated local ballot question is a great idea. I think poverty could be a key issue here, as could global warming, green energy, real universal health care, or the state's pre-empting the rights of communities. Any of these could be framed in a way that progressive dems would chicken out.
>
> But NOT Palestine.
>
> Palestine is a very important issue, and embodies the worst of imperialism and "great power" puppeteering. But it is politically divisive and could be a waste of time for a state political party at best, or a disaster at worst. What's the goal here? To show the public that we can stick our finger in the eye of zionism (most of whom could care less), or to rally people around a populist issue that shows them that we care about their daily worries and pain and that we have some ideas about how to help.
>
> Kudos to those who support peace and justice for Palestinians (and Israelis and everybody), but please, not as a ballot question (or any other official GRP statement for that matter).
>
> NOT Palestine (did I say that already?).
>
> Thx,
>
> Adam
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Ron Francis
> To: State Committee Official Business
> Sent: Sunday, January 7, 2007 3:18:09 PM
> Subject: [statecom] Proposal for Local Ballot 2008 Exploration Comm. - need co-sponsor
>
> Text of Proposal:
>
> A "Local Ballot 2008 Exploration" committee is formed to develop a plan to stimulate identical local ballot initiatives on a single issue in several communities. The local ballot questions would have the party signature on it and would call for a specific instruction to be given to the State Rep in the district. The ballot question must be such as to challenge the root causes of poverty so that it is clearly distinguishable from any intiatives that would be supported by Progressive Democrats.
>
> The Committee is charged with choosing the ballot question issue by April 2007. The Committee is charged with developing materials and finishing the ballot question language by July 2007/ The Committee is to use July 2007 to November of 2007 to identify GRP members in local communities who are willing to work on the local ballot intiative. The Committee Work can be coordinated with the Chapter Building / Chapter Rejuvenation Proposal also submitted at this Statecom.
>
> Background:
>
> Our party needs to be identified with a particular issue that we have a passion about.
>
> It is essential that we choose ballot question that clearly exposes the root causes of the system of power that elites and corporations in the US hold over ordinary people. It is also essential that the established Democrats and most of the Progressive Democrats be unable to support the ballot question. This can be done by choosing an issue that exposes the Democrats (supposedly the party of the working person) so that people will choose GRP over Democrats because they see the Democrats for what they really are.
>
> The Someville ballot Questions on Palestine met the above requirements: They got to the root cause of a social problem and had language that could not be supported by Progressive Democrats in Somerville since the upper echelons of the Democratic Party made it clear to local Democrats that the Party is zionist and that these local Democrats (some of whom are even Progressive Democrats) would go no where if they were openly anti-zionist. These Progressive Democrats in Somerville must now answer to voters who in fact voted at a 45% level for the Right of Return of Palestinian Refugees.
>
> A similar effort is needed for a poverty-related issue.
>
> This propsal is intended to develop a dozen or so local ballot questions in 2008 that lead to a 2010 statewide ballot question that firmly plants in the public's mind what the party stands for. This could be coordinated with a Statewide runs if the party is at that level of development adn has a candidate in place by Summer of 2009. The Statewide run would be coordinated with with more of the same ballot question in 2010 so that an infrastructure is in place to develop the Party as a result of the 2010 Statewide offorts as well as the ongoing local ballot questionefforts of the same year.
>
> If this plan works it sets up the party to win a substantial percentage of the vote in A) many local races or B) in just a few local races and perhaps one big run for Secretary of State that even if lost (the Secretary of State campaign) results in the further establishment of local infrastructure since the Sec run is associates with a particular issue.
> _______________________________________________
> StateCom mailing list
> StateCom at green-rainbow.org
> http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> StateCom mailing list
> StateCom at green-rainbow.org
> http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> statecom-discuss mailing list
> statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org
> http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom-discuss
>