Betreff: Green Party Declaration of Independence (Camejo)
Von: garden beekeeper
Datum: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 21:46:06 -0800 (PST)

--- Peter Camejo wrote:

From: "Peter Camejo" 
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2005 21:03:53 -0800 Subject: RE: [GDI] A proposal for delegate selection. Forrest, this is very rough but it is a first draft to work form towards a proposal on independence. Put this at the back of your list to think about but we should try to submit something for the discussion at our next plenum to begin the discussion. I am very convinced that the lesser evil tendency is now completely moving in the direction of inside/outside strategy and will now openly fight to endorse Democrats. This discussion will be crucial for the future of the Green Party. It benefits the Green Party to bring out the real views of those who want to support Democrats. I think a motion like this will help to clarify the discussion. GREEN PARTY DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE The Green Party exists first and foremost because our planet is being destroyed. The Green Party declares its complete independence from the Democratic and Republican Party as complicit in the policies destroying the planet. The Green Party urges the people of the United States to vote in defense of the Earth and to protect the future of their children and future generations. A vote for the two corporate controlled parties represents a vote against the ten key values of the Green Party. The Green Party while rejecting endorsing of any Democrat or Republican partisan candidate does not reject working with such individuals on issues where agreement exist that promote, peace, social justice, or environmental sustainability. The Green Party as an institution and its Presidential slate and National Steering Committee members must not endorse, urge a vote for, raise funds for or in anyway assist the two corporate controlled parties or its partisan candidates. Such actions are in clear violation of our ten key points. The Green Party is not a centralized party. It welcome political diversity and allows its membership, in fact encourages its members, to express their views openly and publicly on any matter they wish including where they may disagree with decisions of the party. This includes the right to support, work for or vote for any candidate they so wish. They may to so as individuals or organized in any fashion they wish. Such action by members of the Green Party does not contradict its institutional independence. They do so as individuals or as ad hoc formations not as the Green Party as an institution. If the independence of the Green Party is violated and it begins endorsing candidates of the two parties of corruption, war, oppression and environmental destruction its reason to exist will be compromised and its unity endangered. Once that independence is broken, the Green Party will face internal strife and conflict as Greens debate which Democrat or Republican qualifies or does not qualify for support. Those who freely choose to join the two parties of war, social oppression, and environmental destruction and run under the banner of such destructive organizations are not qualified for endorsement by the Green Party. Other parties or independent candidates whose platform reflect the values of the Green Party maybe endorsed, and assisted by the Green Party as an institution. No party seeking to defend the interests of the majority in the history of our nation has longed survived once it breaks with a principle of independence from those parties who represent a minority ruling over and against the people. -----Original Message----- From: Forrest Hill

Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 7:51 AM
Subject: Re: [GDI] A proposal for delegate selection. I agree with Jonathan. We really need to focus on coming up with a fair way of allocating delegates given current state laws regarding primaries. I think we need to focus on three issues: 1. Which states allow Greens to hold a state sponsored primary (last time only 6 states held primaries yet 23 states had ballot access).? Primaries are always better than caucus because they allow people to vote independently for a candidate instead of meeting in a room and "discussing" voting decisions. They also increase voter turnout, so there is less change for manipulation. The GPUS should mandate that states hold primaries wherever states allow Greens to do so. 2. We need the GPUS to step up and enforce rules regarding caucus procedures. Their has to be minimum standard as to what constitutes a legitimate caucus (i.e. how members in the state are contacted, how voting is carried out, the minimum number of voters required to certify the results, etc.). Such information on each caucus must be posted to the web site. 3. Finally, (and perhaps most important) we must have a method for allocating delegates to states. If we can accomplish these three goal,s we will be light years ahead of where we were in 2004. Will it be perfect, no, but we must live within the realm of current political realities (even as we strive to change those realities). When we have a strong national party, with a multitude of viable state parties, then we will be in a better position to change state laws regarding ballot access and voting procedures. Right now we need to pull the party together under the most democratic reforms we can make given current circumstances.... Forrest Steve Greenfield wrote:
If we make that set of assumptions, then we're
back to square one,

I don't think we're "back" to square one because I
don't think we ever
past square one.

and all we can do is to try to equitably allocate
delegates to the

But that is what we primarily set out to do.

Doesn't that render half our discussion moot?

No, it just renders that half to some point in the
future where we can
figure out how to do it. It would involve court and
intervention, stuff I don't think GDI is able to
get involved with right

We cannot solve the legal hurdles littered across
the American electoral
landscape at this time. That will be a century-long
project. For now we
make the Green Party function as close to its own
ideals as the system will
allow. We knew there was a system when we formed
ASGP, and we decided to
attach ourselves to it and transform ourselves from
a collection of fully
independent state parties into a participant with
the federal electoral
system. We can't just suddenly pretend we can
transcend it on our own

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jonathan Lundell" Sent: Monday, January 31, 2005 9:57 PM Subject: Re: [GDI] A proposal for delegate

At 9:16 PM -0500 1/31/05, Steve Greenfield wrote:

I'm sure there are several differences. My point
is only that we can't
impose a primary system of our own devising if
any state laws will bar


Parties within those states from participating.
Conversely, we cannot


to accept the primary results from any state
whose Green Party abides by


own state's laws governing primaries.

If we make that set of assumptions, then we're
back to square one,
and all we can do is to try to equitably allocate
delegates to the

Doesn't that render half our discussion moot?
/Jonathan Lundell.