[Pnp-wg] (no subject)

[Greg Gerritt]

I am opposed to proxies, I think that if you want to vote, show up.  And I
believe that the costs of travel to national converntions are the
responsiblity of state parties as they are soverign bodies in a federation.
I made that very clear in an earlier post.

These points are most important if this body is to base allocation of
delegations on the size of state parties.  If the state party gets a big
delegation becasue they are large and powerful, then demonstrate it.
Demonstrate how well the philosphy the state party uses to grow works.  Lead
by example.  Demonstrate your fundraising prowess.

Is that clear enough?  I am sure Greens can come up with lots of reasons to
oppose that, but RI takes its responsibilities seriously.  We know we are
small, so we do not ask for large allotments of delegates.  And we fund
their travel. If you are asking for a delegation bigger than you can
actually handle, says to me you have not earned it.

Now if you are saying that delegation allotments should be based on
population, regardless of the size of the party, something I think is
appropriate as we are then alloting delegates based on potential, then maybe
the argument for proxies and national funding holds water.  Though I am
always opposed to proxies because that way each person in the room has equal
power.  They all have one vote.

greg  

> From: "jamais vu'" <jamaisvu182@hotmail.com>
> Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 13:19:01 +0000
> To: pnp-wg@lists.gp-us.org
> Subject: [Pnp-wg] (no subject)
> 
> Greens,
> 
> Who cares where the NY delegation voted to have the meeting?   THIS IS NOT
> THE WORK OF THIS GROUP.  The point Steve was trying to make is that travel
> costs are high in manyplaces and that Greens in states without large
> resources should not be disenfranchised. Greg inserting this quip  into what
> should be a serious discussion smacks of sectarian nonsense. Greg, if you
> have a problem with full enfranchisement via proxies (until and unless the
> GPUS pays for delegate travel), say so outright. - make a *political*
> argument.
> 
> Robert Caldwell
> Louisiana
> 
> essage: 5
> Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 17:16:08 -0400
> Subject: Re: [Pnp-wg] Proxy question
> From: Greg Gerritt <gerritt@mindspring.com>
> To: <pnp-wg@gp-us.org>
> 
> I think I remember the NY delegation voting to have the meeting in Tulsa.
> 
>> From: "Steve Greenfield" <bicyclesax@earthlink.net>
>> Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 16:43:48 -0400
>> To: <pnp-wg@gp-us.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Pnp-wg] Proxy question
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pnp-wg mailing list
> Pnp-wg@lists.gp-us.org
> http://lists.gp-us.org/mailman/listinfo/pnp-wg