Wednesday, January 11, 2006
Green National Committee
Understandably, considering that we are just barely out of the holiday season, the National Committee seems to be somewhat inactive. Of course, I am not a member and can only go based on what I see online and hear from National Committee members. That's a hint. (Points to his email address above) I'd love to hear from any of you. Now, if you want to know what the National Committee is apparently up to, click the "Read more!" link below...First of all, anyone who wants to see what's going on in the National Committee has a great resource in the Green Party website. Like all GP committees, the National Committee has a webpage devoted specifically to their activities, and it's right over here
It looks like the National Committee is dealing with only two housekeeping issues at the moment. One, ID 197, would open up the membership of the "Internal Committee" of the "Delegate Apportionment Committee" to a wider variety of members. As currently written, the "Internal Committee" must be made of National Committee members. If passed, ID 197 would allow those appointed by their states to serve, even if they are not members of the NC. This change is called for because not enough members of the National Committee were willing to serve.
The second issue, ID 198, would change the way votes are cast and counted by the "Internal Committee". This is necessary because the computer the committee will use to cast and count ballots is not able to use the software needed. The committee will use the same voting system the National Committee uses.
Frankly, I think that must be the most boring post ever left in the blogosphere, but you know what, that sort of boring detail is so necessary, and I appreciate those willing to tend to such minute detail.
These proposals were both made by the Rhode Island Greens and the Iowa Greens. Holly Hart is the floor manager for both, and Greg Gerritt is the contact person.
It looks like the National Committee is dealing with only two housekeeping issues at the moment. One, ID 197, would open up the membership of the "Internal Committee" of the "Delegate Apportionment Committee" to a wider variety of members. As currently written, the "Internal Committee" must be made of National Committee members. If passed, ID 197 would allow those appointed by their states to serve, even if they are not members of the NC. This change is called for because not enough members of the National Committee were willing to serve.
The second issue, ID 198, would change the way votes are cast and counted by the "Internal Committee". This is necessary because the computer the committee will use to cast and count ballots is not able to use the software needed. The committee will use the same voting system the National Committee uses.
Frankly, I think that must be the most boring post ever left in the blogosphere, but you know what, that sort of boring detail is so necessary, and I appreciate those willing to tend to such minute detail.
These proposals were both made by the Rhode Island Greens and the Iowa Greens. Holly Hart is the floor manager for both, and Greg Gerritt is the contact person.
// posted by Gregg Jocoy @ 8:06 AM 
Comments:
<< Home
Ummmm.
What about the two other SMALL issues? An election and an impeachment.
The National Committee is still deciding how to resolve the election it held for Steering Committee members in Tulsa back in July!
First the Steering Committee announced the last seat was unfilled--ie: none of the above. Then, they claimed to correct themselves and said that Tom Sevigny had won. But, outside green verifiers claimed that Kristen Olson won.
So, we went through a try at compromise--seating both. Until Tom suddenly renegged and resigned.
Now 4 different states (and big ones, at that) FL, CA, NY, and PA are trying to force the Steering Committee to let the NC decide. But, the SC is being stubborn.
Which relates to the impeachment.
The impeachment started because the SC had started a vacancy election (which they had the right to do.) But, they stopped the vacancy election suddenly, when they thought there was a way to install Tom Sevigny.
So, the ones who voted for that outcome are under impeachment charges (from 3 states).
Anyway, I just think it is funny that anyone could report on the NC and not report on the election and the impeachment which are taking up the majority of posts and energy right now.
(And, are the concerns of the majority of greens in the country, if you add up greens in FL, CA, NY, and PA.)
What about the two other SMALL issues? An election and an impeachment.
The National Committee is still deciding how to resolve the election it held for Steering Committee members in Tulsa back in July!
First the Steering Committee announced the last seat was unfilled--ie: none of the above. Then, they claimed to correct themselves and said that Tom Sevigny had won. But, outside green verifiers claimed that Kristen Olson won.
So, we went through a try at compromise--seating both. Until Tom suddenly renegged and resigned.
Now 4 different states (and big ones, at that) FL, CA, NY, and PA are trying to force the Steering Committee to let the NC decide. But, the SC is being stubborn.
Which relates to the impeachment.
The impeachment started because the SC had started a vacancy election (which they had the right to do.) But, they stopped the vacancy election suddenly, when they thought there was a way to install Tom Sevigny.
So, the ones who voted for that outcome are under impeachment charges (from 3 states).
Anyway, I just think it is funny that anyone could report on the NC and not report on the election and the impeachment which are taking up the majority of posts and energy right now.
(And, are the concerns of the majority of greens in the country, if you add up greens in FL, CA, NY, and PA.)
# posted by 
: 8:19 PM
: 8:19 PM
anon makes a valid point here, but I do want to defend myself a little bit.
I own a micro-business. I have spent some of my own time and money, although precious little cash I'll admit, because I wanted to, to build this site. I am certain that I have and will continue to fail my readers.
But please try to put that down to lack of skill and/or time/talent. I have never done anything like this, and I am sure I have and will continue to fail. I appreciate you and others bringing my failures to my attention, but please try to believe that these failures are because I don't have the time and/or experience to do as good a job as you deserve.
I may be arrogant for saying so, but I believe the mainstream media should be reporting on this issue. The idea that a co-chair of the national party was unsettled this far post-election is deserving of coverage. But I doubt that such a thing would get covered even if it happened in the Democratic or Republican parties.
I also want to point out again that I am not a member of the National Committee and as such have no access to their email discussions. The fact that this is apparently a major issue today and that I didn't know it reflects how out of touch I am with the goings-on at the National Committee. Without someone from the NC letting me know what's going on, I am forced to go with what's on the website.
I have written folks in NY, and have reported on NY events. Likewise PA, and I have written echo in FL and Mike Feinstein in CA and neither has responded yet, but this is all-volunteer. I can't be upset if they choose to leave me out of the loop. I have a limited readership and resources. Perhaps you can drop me an email with more details?
I own a micro-business. I have spent some of my own time and money, although precious little cash I'll admit, because I wanted to, to build this site. I am certain that I have and will continue to fail my readers.
But please try to put that down to lack of skill and/or time/talent. I have never done anything like this, and I am sure I have and will continue to fail. I appreciate you and others bringing my failures to my attention, but please try to believe that these failures are because I don't have the time and/or experience to do as good a job as you deserve.
I may be arrogant for saying so, but I believe the mainstream media should be reporting on this issue. The idea that a co-chair of the national party was unsettled this far post-election is deserving of coverage. But I doubt that such a thing would get covered even if it happened in the Democratic or Republican parties.
I also want to point out again that I am not a member of the National Committee and as such have no access to their email discussions. The fact that this is apparently a major issue today and that I didn't know it reflects how out of touch I am with the goings-on at the National Committee. Without someone from the NC letting me know what's going on, I am forced to go with what's on the website.
I have written folks in NY, and have reported on NY events. Likewise PA, and I have written echo in FL and Mike Feinstein in CA and neither has responded yet, but this is all-volunteer. I can't be upset if they choose to leave me out of the loop. I have a limited readership and resources. Perhaps you can drop me an email with more details?
I know that you reached out to people in NY, but you reached out to the wrong Co-Chair.
;)
Really, we appreciate your coverage of NY.
And, I know you can't know everything that is going on. That is why I am posting here.
;)
Really, we appreciate your coverage of NY.
And, I know you can't know everything that is going on. That is why I am posting here.
# posted by : 9:34 PM
: 9:34 PM
Excellent anon. Thanks for the update, and please do continue to comment. I'll take the time this weekend to reach more folks from the states mentioned.
To be frank, the "majority of Greens" in any state in this union neither know nor care about the nonsense surrounding the election or impeachment. To say so is simply preposterous.
We have a real election coming up - of the sort that elects Greens to public office - and there is a small group (136 people, at last count) which is not only placing their concerns and energy into this divisive matter, but then pretending that it is the primary occupation of Greens in their states.
Post a Comment
We have a real election coming up - of the sort that elects Greens to public office - and there is a small group (136 people, at last count) which is not only placing their concerns and energy into this divisive matter, but then pretending that it is the primary occupation of Greens in their states.
# posted by : 10:31 AM
: 10:31 AM << Home
