Green News and Opinion

Well, we've all heard the expression that we have put the cart before the horse. We have also heard that we need not shut the barn door after the horse has gotten out. Maybe you have wondered, which came first, the chicken, or the egg.

Well, the Green Party has apparently done this, and apparently the chicken came first, at least for the Peace Action Committee of the GPUS.

You see, these folks have behaved as if they were a duly authorized committee in the Green Party. Don't ask me how it happened that a committee was created, peopled, given web space at gp.org, had money (a tiny sum) allocated to it's work by at least one state, if not the national or other states, and gotten into conflicts internally with the Lavender Caucus.

In Proposal 190 the Peace Action Committee is directed to implement Proposal 190. Would someone please explain to me how a non-existent committee is supposed to implement a GP policy?

Now, in an effort to bring the Peace Action Committee (aka GPAX) into compliance, the Green National Committee is considering Proposal 238 which would authorize the committee, which is already engaged in work it is now seeking authorization to do.

This is in the discussion stage. Frankly, if I were a National Committee member, I would be asking a lot of hard questions, such as, Why has the committee been working without permission from the National Committee? Why didn't the Accreditation Committee demand that the Peace Action Committee be accredited before getting to work? Have the other committees all been constituted properly? Eco Action? The caucuses?

Nothing behind the "Read more!" link on this one gang, but I am really trying to get my head wrapped around this one, and to be honest, I am not convinced at this point that the Peace Action Committee is accomplishing whatever goals it's creators had in mind.