[Peace-discussion] Fwd: [usgp-coo] ID 238- A No Vote to Correct Language in Resolution

Tue, 1 Aug 2006 23:15:10 -0400

------=_Part_22111_31195843.1154488510128
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Heads up on some the debate regarding Resolution 238:

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Mato Ska <m_zehr@hotmail.com >
Date: Aug 1, 2006 8:26 PM
Subject: Re: [usgp-coo] ID 238- A No Vote to Correct Language in Resolution
To: Owen Broadhurst <owen.broadhurst@gmail.com>, natlcomvotes@green.gpus.org

I suggest that we establish something as a guideline BEFORE making GPAX a
standing committee. There is way too much cat-herding going on not to
establish consistent policies and procedures starting RIGHT NOW. Why vote on
making GPAX a standing committee before we can even agree on what a standing
committee is and how it will function? I would make the case that the
existing committee structure and internal guidelines have made such a mess
of things that we need to establish what their purposes are within the
party. No one seems to know and everyone wants to decide for him or her/self

what the committee can do. These are working committees. Their job is to
accomplish certain defined tasks in a way that support state parties and the
national campaigns.

Removal is needed in any organizational structure to provide a mechanism
that addresses carrying out the responsibilities of the committees and
enable the committees to function effectively. States have their own bodies
and representatives which they have authority over. A standing committee
needs to be a working committee, not a debating society.

A working committee needs to recognize its obligations, such as filing
reports, requesting a budget, defining its mission and yearly goals and
objectives. It also needs to work with all levels of the party organization
and effectively assist candidates, not create conflicts with them. It needs
to function as an integral component of the GPUS and the state party and not
as an advocacy group with its own agenda.

Mato Ska
Delegate
NMGP
----- Original Message -----
From: "Owen Broadhurst" <owen.broadhurst@gmail.com>
To: < natlcomvotes@green.gpus.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 5:08 PM
Subject: Re: [usgp-coo] ID 238- A No Vote to Correct Language in Resolution

> On 8/1/06, Mato Ska < m_zehr@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > There is no real Mission Statement here and no way of removing members.
>
>
>
> I will address this sentence alone at the moment to reiterate again my
views
> on member removal.
>
> I would oppose it if it did allow for members to be removed.
>
> Throughout my time as an NC delegate, I have consistently maintained that
> the removal of members must solely remain a state party prerogative.
>
> --
> > Owen R. Broadhurst
> > Candidate for State Representative
> > Third Hampden District
> > http://www.owenbroadhurst.org
> _______________________________________________
> Natlcomvotes mailing list

-- 
Owen R. Broadhurst
Candidate for State Representative
Third Hampden District
http://www.owenbroadhurst.org

------=_Part_22111_31195843.1154488510128
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Heads up on some the debate regarding Resolution 238: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Mato Ska &lt;<a onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href="mailto:m_zehr@hotmail.com" target="_blank">
m_zehr@hotmail.com </a>&gt; Date: Aug 1, 2006 8:26 PM Subject: Re: [usgp-coo] ID 238- A No Vote to Correct Language in Resolution To: Owen Broadhurst &lt;<a onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href="mailto:owen.broadhurst@gmail.com" target="_blank">
owen.broadhurst@gmail.com</a>&gt;, <a onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href="mailto:natlcomvotes@green.gpus.org" target="_blank">natlcomvotes@green.gpus.org</a> I suggest that we establish something as a guideline BEFORE making GPAX a
 standing committee. There is way too much cat-herding going on not to establish consistent policies and procedures starting RIGHT NOW. Why vote on making GPAX a standing committee before we can even agree on what a standing
 committee is and how it will function? I would make the case that the existing committee structure and internal guidelines have made such a mess of things that we need to establish what their purposes are within the
 party. No one seems to know and everyone wants to decide for him or her/self what the committee can do. These are working committees. Their job is to accomplish certain defined tasks in a way that support state parties and the
 national campaigns. Removal is needed in any organizational structure to provide a mechanism that addresses carrying out the responsibilities of the committees and enable the committees to function effectively. States have their own bodies
 and representatives which they have authority over. A standing committee needs to be a working committee, not a debating society. A working committee needs to recognize its obligations, such as filing reports, requesting a budget, defining its mission and yearly goals and
 objectives. It also needs to work with all levels of the party organization and effectively assist candidates, not create conflicts with them. It needs to function as an integral component of the GPUS and the state party and not
 as an advocacy group with its own agenda. Mato Ska Delegate NMGP ----- Original Message ----- From: &quot;Owen Broadhurst&quot; &lt;<a onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href="mailto:owen.broadhurst@gmail.com" target="_blank">
owen.broadhurst@gmail.com</a>&gt; To: &lt;<a onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href="mailto:natlcomvotes@green.gpus.org" target="_blank"> natlcomvotes@green.gpus.org</a>&gt; Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 5:08 PM
 Subject: Re: [usgp-coo] ID 238- A No Vote to Correct Language in Resolution &gt; On 8/1/06, Mato Ska &lt;<a onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href="mailto:m_zehr@hotmail.com" target="_blank">
 m_zehr@hotmail.com</a>&gt; wrote: &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; There is no real Mission Statement here and no way of removing members. &gt; &gt; &gt; &gt; I will address this sentence alone at the moment to reiterate again my 
 views &gt; on member removal. &gt; &gt; I would oppose it if it did allow for members to be removed. &gt; &gt; Throughout my time as an NC delegate, I have consistently maintained that &gt; the removal of members must solely remain a state party prerogative. 
 &gt; &gt; -- &gt; &gt; Owen R. Broadhurst &gt; &gt; Candidate for State Representative &gt; &gt; Third Hampden District &gt; &gt; <a onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href="http://www.owenbroadhurst.org/" target="_blank">
http://www.owenbroadhurst.org</a> &gt; _______________________________________________ &gt; Natlcomvotes mailing list -- Owen R. Broadhurst Candidate for State Representative Third Hampden District
 <a onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href="http://www.owenbroadhurst.org/" target="_blank">http://www.owenbroadhurst.org</a>

------=_Part_22111_31195843.1154488510128--