[Pnp-wg] Re: virtual convention ? (formerly 'So the '04processwas rigged')

[Gary]

<you`re absolutely correct, Phil. We don=B4t have the data, or probably the=
 time to come up with all the answers by this WG. I propose, however, that =
we CAN try for consensus on IDEAS we think represent our Platform and our i=
ndividual Greens.

Thus, as simple statement supporting the CONCEPT of one Green-one vote, or =
proportional representation, and asking the appropriate standing committee =
(would=B4`t be surprised if we do well, we become a standing committee) to =
help with the research and implementation of our ideas.

Let=B4s remember, we`re just the first cog in the machine, but if we set as=
ide ideals as being too impractical, or even impossible, those ideas die wi=
th us. Let`s try to breathe life into them, and get IL ballot access in a f=
ashion that you want it.

Gary
FL


---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: "Phil Huckelberry" <phil@mcleancountygreens.org>
Date:  Thu, 7 Apr 2005 16:46:05 -0500 (CDT)

>Gary writes:
>> I'm trying to find ways to "level the playing field" between
>> register/non-register states, as well as gather the data necessary for
>> full participation by each and every Green.If states allow only a single=

>> vote, how do they indicate a preference if their candidate is not the
>> winner?
>
>I see the same problem here as before - some state laws essentially
>_require_ using their primary to select/bind delegates.  I don't have good=

>data on this but I believe that this is likely to derail your idea -
>unless you've got a way around it.
>
>We really do not have good information about these laws from state to
>state and I'm not sure what the best way to go about getting such
>information is.
>
>This may sound horribly tangential, but bear with it:  the Libertarian
>Party of Oklahoma is awaiting a ruling from the US Supreme Court regarding=

>participation in their primaries.  If they win, it will be a major victory=

>for "party rights" - a victory that we would be able to use to do things
>like tell states that we demand the right to include NOTA on our primary
>ballots, or we demand the right to use IRV for our party primaries.
>
>I think one of the recommendations that this committee should make is to
>encourage state parties who use or expect to be able to use primaries to
>look into ways of improving those primaries.  It might work in some
>states.
>
>Phil Huckelberry
>Illinois Green Party
>_______________________________________________
>Pnp-wg mailing list
>Pnp-wg@lists.gp-us.org
>http://lists.gp-us.org/mailman/listinfo/pnp-wg
>