[statecom] [adcom] Explanation for actions

[Merelice]

Folks,

This is not the first time we have heard this so-called explanation.
It assumes a moral superiority that says anyone who disagress with
Grace does not hold high ethical, legal, and fiduciary standards. That
is character assassination.

Please understand that this explanation is being presented now to
prepare you for actions that some members of AdCom wish to undertake
-- actions that would thwart, usurp, or ignore StateCom's April 12
consensus on how the party should FULFILL our current amended delegate
selection plan by assigning delegates to the six candidates who earned
them in our presidential primary. These actions continue a pattern of
efforts NOT to abide by this requirement of the Party's delegate
selection plan -- despite claims to the contrary. Please don't be
duped.

Merelice


On 5/21/08, Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com <Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com> wrote:
> I very much appreciate those who have asked me why I care about how we carry
>  out our entire Presidential Nominating process.
>
>  Rather than answer in bits and pieces, this is a brief attempt.
>
>  We are essentially a non-profit organization by law.   Our by-laws are
>  legally binding.   Those of us on adcom are therefore legally and fiduciarily
>  responsible for implementation of our corporate responsibilities.   For instance, we
>  are supposed to have access to and review all documents sent out in our
>  corporate name.   (See Attorney General's website for one document describing
>  fiduciary responsibilities - like reading and following by-laws)
>
>  In a Presiential Primary Election - our actions (how people get on our
>  ballot, selecton of delegates) become an extension of the state's legal
>  responsibilities to the voters, candidates and our democracy.   Therefore, such
>  constitutional requirements as an equal right to run for a represetantive office (such
>  as a convention delegate) apply to our actions.   As you may already realize,
>  this is why our Delegate Selection Plan has to be filed with the state.   And
>  why it is legally binding on our actions.
>
>  Since I have been and expect to continue to be in fiduciary positions,
>  carrying out those responsiblities legally matters to me.
>
>  And in these matters, as an extension of our government, I am sure we would
>  not want to put ourselves in the very positions we complain about other elected
>  officials - not reading the details of documents we are deciding upon, not
>  following our agreements as elected representatives, etc.
>
>  That is why...
>
>  Thanks for listening, Grace
>