[Pnp-wg] Fw: [gpnj-GreenCouncil] Interim report done - Presidential Nominating Process Work Group

[Fred]

I'm in favor of the report a second time.

On another point:

I lived on the southside of Chicago and currently live in Detroit.  When 
Congress includes people who can't vote in voting apportionment, for 
example, undocumented workers, it is not democratic and has its origins in 
the constitutional stipulation of enslaved Black people counting for 3/5 of 
a person before the Civil War to increase representation for the slave 
owners in the government.

The question of how excluded people are represented in our party is not 
answered by counting them in population numbers. We need to develop good 
working relationships with organizations of undocumented workers and 
organizations that work with and for them.  We need to make a special effort 
to find the road to reaching them and convincing them to become Greens.  It 
is one of the reasons that I am very interested in the experiences of Greens 
in California and any experience of Greens winning the support of excluded 
people.

Having said that, I think that population must be a factor in weighing 
delegate apportionment.  Including excluded people through population 
counting is not a good argument for using it.

Fred
Michigan

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Phil Huckelberry" <phil@mcleancountygreens.org>
To: <pnp-wg@gp-us.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2005 9:04 PM
Subject: Re: [Pnp-wg] Fw: [gpnj-GreenCouncil] Interim report done - 
Presidential Nominating Process Work Group


Steve Kramer writes:
> Phil's point about representation in the U.S. typically taking into
> account all citizens, which Greg echoed in wishing to "model America" in
> our delegate count, is well-taken.  For further support, the Republican
> and Democratic Parties use population in their counts, heavily adjusted
> for voting strength (but not in a way that any of them can describe in
> detail...and I've asked!)
>
> However, this too has led to some paradoxical results.  For example,
> there are members of the House currently sitting whose elections featured
> a turnout of as little as half that of other members.  This of course has
> a lot to do with the gerrymandering behavior of the two parties, and the
> apathy that they generate...but it creates a somewhat uneven and
> undesirable situation in our Congress.

Unfortunately, Liz thought I was "distorting" her view on this point
earlier; really, I was trying to take what she was saying and see how it
fit in.

Steve's point here is spot on.  There's a single congressional district in
Illinois where voter turnout is about half that of all of the other 18
districts; it's one of the two most disgustingly gerrymandered districts
in the state, drawn to include as many Hispanic voters (and possibly also
Asian voters) as possible.  One of our state party members remarked that
in taking the census, undocumented foreign nationals (usually called
"illegal aliens", a term I find pejorative) are counted, and it's
well-known that there are large numbers of non-citizens from Mexico and
south living in Hispanic neighborhoods of Chicago, who, of course, don't
vote.  Additionally, it seems that there are a lot more under-18 residents
of this district.  Therefore, the lowest voter turnout in the state in
terms of numbers, by far.

I'm legitimately wondering what everyone's take on this is.  The way
congressional apportionment is done, it doesn't matter whether someone is
eligible to vote or not.  Even if you don't believe we should care about
population, I'd like feedback on this question because it might be that we
can find unexpected common ground here, or it might be that we see a
clearer _philosophical_ break between some of our views instead of just a
difference of opinion on one issue.

I'm personally sort of ambivalent about the situation I describe; I guess
I can't come up with a better option.  I'm not convinced that recent
non-naturalized immigrants should have the right to vote but I'm not
convinced to the contrary either; frankly, I know a lot about nuclear
power and structural electoral reform and not a whole lot about immigrant
issues.

I apologize if this seems like too much of a tangent, but in my mind,
there's a clear connection, even if I'm not drawing it very well.

Phil Huckelberry
Illinois Green Party

_______________________________________________
Pnp-wg mailing list
Pnp-wg@lists.gp-us.org
http://lists.gp-us.org/mailman/listinfo/pnp-wg