Friday, August 04, 2006
Vote NO on Proposal 238
I have published this at Green Commons and also atChlorophyll. I know that some of you will have already read this, but if not, please go behind the "Read more!" link, because I really think we need to address this issue....
Imagine that you have an idea for a committee for the Green Party. Maybe you think the Greens are not doing enough to advance the cause of decentralization. You and some friends design the "Green Decentralization Committee" and give it an acrnonym, say "GDEC". Then you populate the committee with party activists and ask for money and web space from the national party.
Then someone points out that the committee has never really been established by the National Committee. What to do now?
The National Committee should reject the application by GPAX to establish the Peace Action Committee, and if you look behind the "read more" link you will read why I think so, and why I am encouraging you to contact your NC reps and ask them to vote against this improper move...
Here's the situation as it stands.
According to the National Committee website itself, Proposal 238 creates the Peace Action Committee, and is proposed by the Peace Action Committee, so in effect, the committee has proposed it's own creation. This is not the way GP rules are set up, and the vote should be stopped immediately.
All proposals brought before the National Committee must be proposed by a recognized and accredited state party or by a recognized and accredited caucus.
There is no excuse for this sloppy ham fisted attempt to do Green business without proper process. One of the two people listed as being involved in the process of establishing this committee has written back to say that I raise an interesting point, but to date nothing has been done to address this failure to follow proper process.
I am ALL FOR ignoring proper process when there are serious reasons or severe time constraints, but the establishment of GPAX fills neither of these requirements.
A state or caucus must vote to present this to the NC for a vote before it is presented to the National Committee for consideration. There is no other mechanism for the creation of a national level Green Party committee, and the National Committee should reject the GPAX application until they re-submit it following it's presentation by a state or caucus.
Please consider contacting your representative and asking them to vote no on Proposal 238.
From the Proposal 238 page at gp.org:
Proposal Details
Proposal ID 238
Proposal Formal Recognition of GPUS Peace Action Committee GPAX
Presenter Green Party of the US Peace Action Committee
Floor Manager Steve Kramer
Phase Voting
Discussion 07/17/2006 - 07/30/2006
Voting 07/31/2006 - 08/06/2006
Imagine that you have an idea for a committee for the Green Party. Maybe you think the Greens are not doing enough to advance the cause of decentralization. You and some friends design the "Green Decentralization Committee" and give it an acrnonym, say "GDEC". Then you populate the committee with party activists and ask for money and web space from the national party.
Then someone points out that the committee has never really been established by the National Committee. What to do now?
The National Committee should reject the application by GPAX to establish the Peace Action Committee, and if you look behind the "read more" link you will read why I think so, and why I am encouraging you to contact your NC reps and ask them to vote against this improper move...
Here's the situation as it stands.
According to the National Committee website itself, Proposal 238 creates the Peace Action Committee, and is proposed by the Peace Action Committee, so in effect, the committee has proposed it's own creation. This is not the way GP rules are set up, and the vote should be stopped immediately.
All proposals brought before the National Committee must be proposed by a recognized and accredited state party or by a recognized and accredited caucus.
There is no excuse for this sloppy ham fisted attempt to do Green business without proper process. One of the two people listed as being involved in the process of establishing this committee has written back to say that I raise an interesting point, but to date nothing has been done to address this failure to follow proper process.
I am ALL FOR ignoring proper process when there are serious reasons or severe time constraints, but the establishment of GPAX fills neither of these requirements.
A state or caucus must vote to present this to the NC for a vote before it is presented to the National Committee for consideration. There is no other mechanism for the creation of a national level Green Party committee, and the National Committee should reject the GPAX application until they re-submit it following it's presentation by a state or caucus.
Please consider contacting your representative and asking them to vote no on Proposal 238.
From the Proposal 238 page at gp.org:
Proposal Details
Proposal ID 238
Proposal Formal Recognition of GPUS Peace Action Committee GPAX
Presenter Green Party of the US Peace Action Committee
Floor Manager Steve Kramer
Phase Voting
Discussion 07/17/2006 - 07/30/2006
Voting 07/31/2006 - 08/06/2006
// posted by Gregg Jocoy @ 1:48 PM 
