Proposals for 2005 Spring State Committee Meeting

Proposals for the State Committee meeting can be submitted, revised, and commented on here. The State Committee meeting is on DAYNAME MONTH DATE, YEAR (TBD). State Committee proceedures say that the last day to submit anything here is MEETING DAY MINUS 2 WEEKS.

Any two members of the State and Administrative Committees, or any Green-Rainbow Local, may submit a proposal for the State Committee to consider.

If you have proposals that are ready to post, do not hesitate as it gives people more of a chance to read it and comment on it ahead of time and possibly improve it.

If you have the proposal already in a word processor document, please attach the document at the bottom of your post to facilitate the process of making the proposal package for the meeting.

Please read them completely so you are prepared for clarifying questions, discussion, and decisionmaking. If you have comments ahead of time, you can post a follow up here and you can contact the sponsors of the proposal.

Candidate Endorsement Procedure
Saturday April 02, @10:11PM by CDLC, (Dave England, acting secretary)
from the Candidate Development and Legal Committee committee.
Recent experience has indicated a need to formalize the party candidate-endorsement process, to ensure that candidates acknowledge and understand what is expected of them when they campaign under the GRP banner, and to guide the relevant party committees in granting endorsements.
Read More (2 comments)

Justice for Palestinians Position (2nd try!)
Saturday April 02, @08:40AM by Ron Francis, Julie Saad
Over the last two months the Green-Rainbow has had to consider and in fact issue positions on matters related to Palestine. The following text was drafted by several Statecom members and in fact supported by Adcom unanimously as part of a letter sent to UJP explaining why the UJP Position on Palestine and some other matters was not acceptable.

Article 2-- International Convention on the
Suppression and Punishment
of the Crime of Apartheid

For the purpose of the present Convention, the term
"the crime of
apartheid", which shall include similar policies and
practices of
racial segregation and discrimination as practiced in
southern Africa,
shall apply to the following inhuman acts committed
for the purpose of
establishing and maintaining domination by one racial
group of persons
over any other racial group of persons and
systematically oppressing
them:


(a) Denial to a member or members of a racial group or

groups of the
right to life and liberty of person:

(i) By murder of members of a racial group or groups—
Murder of indigenous Palestinian people (since
September, 2000 alone,
there have been over 3, 565 Palestinians
killed and over 625
of these were children);


(ii) By the infliction upon the members of a racial
group or groups of
serious bodily or mental harm, by the infringement of
their freedom or
dignity, or by subjecting them to torture or to cruel,

inhuman or
degrading treatment or punishment;
Infliction upon indigenous Palestinians of serious
bodily harm (over
28, 441 injuries since September, 2000) and mental
harm by infringement
of freedom and dignity, subjection to torture and to
cruel and inhuman
and degrading treatment and punishment


(iii) By arbitrary arrest and illegal imprisonment of
the members of a
racial group or groups;
Arbitrary arrest and illegal imprisonment of
indigenous Palestinians
(Palestinian political prisoners currently number 8000

and total
detentions since 1967 number at least 600,000);

(b) Deliberate imposition on a racial group or groups
of living
conditions calculated to cause its or their physical
destruction in
whole or in part;
Deliberately imposed living conditions calculated to
cause the
destruction of Palestinians as a people as well as
their way of life
through colonial settlement, the Apartheid Wall,
checkpoints, curfews,
collective punishment through destruction of villages,

homes,
hospitals, schools, and farm property, and deprivation

of life
sustaining resources such as water, electricity

(This seems to be the heart of the document to me -
ron....)

(c) Any legislative measures and other measures
calculated to prevent a
racial group or groups from participation in the
political, social,
economic and cultural life of the country and the
deliberate creation
of conditions preventing the full development of such
a group or
groups, in particular by denying to members of a
racial group or groups
basic human rights and freedoms, including the right
to work, the right
to form recognized trade unions, the right to
education, the right to
leave and to return to their country, the right to a
nationality, the
right to freedom of movement and residence, the right
to freedom of
opinion and _expression, and the right to freedom of
peaceful assembly
and association;

Legislative measures and other measures calculated to
prevent
Palestinians from participation in the political,
social, economic, and
cultural life by denying them basic human rights and
freedoms including
--the right to nationality-- The Law of Return, the
Absentee Property
Law and the Nationality Law codify a distinction
between nationality
and citizenship that allows the state of Israel to
deny nationality
rights to
non-Jewish citizens.
--the right to work-- Palestinians in the West Bank
and Gaza have been
eliminated from the work force within Green Line.
Destruction of farm
land and prevention of harvesting life sustaining
crops.
--the right to education—Palestinian children are
denied the right toi
education in a number of ways including but not
limited to extensive
curfews and school closures in the West Bank and Gaza,

restriction of
access to education and defunding of schools for
Palestinian children
within the Green Line, settlers and soldiers shooting
at children
attending school
--the right to leave and to return to their
country—Palestinians must
apply to the state of Israel to leave Palestine and
are subject to
extensive harassment at border crossings
--the right to freedom of movement and
residence—Palestinians within
the Green Line are prevented from visiting family in
the West Bank and
Gaza, all Palestinians are restricted from moving
freely within their
own communities by checkpoints, settlements, military
bypass roads,
Israeli only roads, the Wall, etc.
-- the right to freedom of opinion and
_expression—Palestinians both
within the Green Line and in the West Bank and Gaza
are routinely
illegally detained and tortured for expressing the
national interests
of the Palestinian people
--the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and
association—Palestinians both within the Green Line
and in the West
Bank and Gaza are prevented from exercising their
right to freedom of
peaceful assembly and association through violent
military repression
of peaceful demonstrations (eg 13 Palestinans with
Israeli citizenship
were shot and killed and hundreds were injured for
protesting at the
beginning of the second Intifada), targeted
assassination, illegal
detention and torture, collective punishment in the
form of bombing
villages and destruction of homes, infrastructure,
farm property, and
schools, etc.
d) Any measures including legislative measures,
designed to divide the
population along racial lines by the creation of
separate reserves and
ghettos for the members of a racial group or groups,
the prohibition of
mixed marriages among members of various racial
groups, the
expropriation of landed property belonging to a racial

group or groups
or to members thereof;

Measures designed to divide the population along
racial lines by the
creation of separate reserves and ghettos for
Palestinians and the
expropriation of land and property belonging to
Palestinians include
the historical case of the colonization of 78% of
historic Palestine in
1948, settlement of additional Palestinian land in the

West Bank and
Gaza since 1967 and most recently through the
annexation of another 15%
of the West Bank through the Apartheid Wall.

(e) Exploitation of the labour of the members of a
racial group or
groups, in particular by submitting them to forced
labour
For example, Moshe Dayan’s description of the forced
displacement of
Bedouins and the theft of their farm land for the
purpose of creating
an “urban proletariat”.

(f) Persecution of organizations and persons, by
depriving them of
fundamental rights and freedoms, because they oppose
apartheid.
Persecution of Palestinian organizations and
Palestinian people on both
sides of the Green Line by depriving them of
fundamental rights and
freedoms because they oppose Apartheid. As in the
case of Azmi
Bishara, an elected member of the Knesset who was
placed under house
arrest for campaigning against the separation of
citizenship and
nationality rights. Still other examples include the
imprisonment of
members of the political group Abnaa al Balad within
the Green Line, as
well as members of the PFLP (Popular Front for the
Liberation of
Palestine, Hamas, and other groups who explicity
oppose the Israeli
state)

Read More (4 comments)

Justice For Palestinians Position
Saturday April 02, @08:27AM by Ron Francis, Julie Saad
Over the last 6 months that Party has had to take positions on Palestine in at least two occurences. As a reslut, several Statecom members drafted a position on Palestine that we believe is consistent with Green-Rianbow value of diversity and anti-racism. While the Party has never approved this text, it should also be noted that this text was supported by Acdom members unanimously in a letter to the UJP as part of an explanation of why the UJP position on Palestine was unacceptable.

Background inforamtion on Palestine is provided below and isavailable on many websites...

Article 2-- International Convention on the
Suppression and Punishment
of the Crime of Apartheid

For the purpose of the present Convention, the term
"the crime of
apartheid", which shall include similar policies and
practices of
racial segregation and discrimination as practiced in
southern Africa,
shall apply to the following inhuman acts committed
for the purpose of
establishing and maintaining domination by one racial
group of persons
over any other racial group of persons and
systematically oppressing
them:


(a) Denial to a member or members of a racial group or

groups of the
right to life and liberty of person:

(i) By murder of members of a racial group or groups—
Murder of indigenous Palestinian people (since
September, 2000 alone,
there have been over 3, 565 Palestinians
killed and over 625
of these were children);


(ii) By the infliction upon the members of a racial
group or groups of
serious bodily or mental harm, by the infringement of
their freedom or
dignity, or by subjecting them to torture or to cruel,

inhuman or
degrading treatment or punishment;
Infliction upon indigenous Palestinians of serious
bodily harm (over
28, 441 injuries since September, 2000) and mental
harm by infringement
of freedom and dignity, subjection to torture and to
cruel and inhuman
and degrading treatment and punishment


(iii) By arbitrary arrest and illegal imprisonment of
the members of a
racial group or groups;
Arbitrary arrest and illegal imprisonment of
indigenous Palestinians
(Palestinian political prisoners currently number 8000

and total
detentions since 1967 number at least 600,000);

(b) Deliberate imposition on a racial group or groups
of living
conditions calculated to cause its or their physical
destruction in
whole or in part;
Deliberately imposed living conditions calculated to
cause the
destruction of Palestinians as a people as well as
their way of life
through colonial settlement, the Apartheid Wall,
checkpoints, curfews,
collective punishment through destruction of villages,

homes,
hospitals, schools, and farm property, and deprivation

of life
sustaining resources such as water, electricity

(This seems to be the heart of the document to me -
ron....)

(c) Any legislative measures and other measures
calculated to prevent a
racial group or groups from participation in the
political, social,
economic and cultural life of the country and the
deliberate creation
of conditions preventing the full development of such
a group or
groups, in particular by denying to members of a
racial group or groups
basic human rights and freedoms, including the right
to work, the right
to form recognized trade unions, the right to
education, the right to
leave and to return to their country, the right to a
nationality, the
right to freedom of movement and residence, the right
to freedom of
opinion and _expression, and the right to freedom of
peaceful assembly
and association;

Legislative measures and other measures calculated to
prevent
Palestinians from participation in the political,
social, economic, and
cultural life by denying them basic human rights and
freedoms including
--the right to nationality-- The Law of Return, the
Absentee Property
Law and the Nationality Law codify a distinction
between nationality
and citizenship that allows the state of Israel to
deny nationality
rights to
non-Jewish citizens.
--the right to work-- Palestinians in the West Bank
and Gaza have been
eliminated from the work force within Green Line.
Destruction of farm
land and prevention of harvesting life sustaining
crops.
--the right to education—Palestinian children are
denied the right toi
education in a number of ways including but not
limited to extensive
curfews and school closures in the West Bank and Gaza,

restriction of
access to education and defunding of schools for
Palestinian children
within the Green Line, settlers and soldiers shooting
at children
attending school
--the right to leave and to return to their
country—Palestinians must
apply to the state of Israel to leave Palestine and
are subject to
extensive harassment at border crossings
--the right to freedom of movement and
residence—Palestinians within
the Green Line are prevented from visiting family in
the West Bank and
Gaza, all Palestinians are restricted from moving
freely within their
own communities by checkpoints, settlements, military
bypass roads,
Israeli only roads, the Wall, etc.
-- the right to freedom of opinion and
_expression—Palestinians both
within the Green Line and in the West Bank and Gaza
are routinely
illegally detained and tortured for expressing the
national interests
of the Palestinian people
--the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and
association—Palestinians both within the Green Line
and in the West
Bank and Gaza are prevented from exercising their
right to freedom of
peaceful assembly and association through violent
military repression
of peaceful demonstrations (eg 13 Palestinans with
Israeli citizenship
were shot and killed and hundreds were injured for
protesting at the
beginning of the second Intifada), targeted
assassination, illegal
detention and torture, collective punishment in the
form of bombing
villages and destruction of homes, infrastructure,
farm property, and
schools, etc.
d) Any measures including legislative measures,
designed to divide the
population along racial lines by the creation of
separate reserves and
ghettos for the members of a racial group or groups,
the prohibition of
mixed marriages among members of various racial
groups, the
expropriation of landed property belonging to a racial

group or groups
or to members thereof;

Measures designed to divide the population along
racial lines by the
creation of separate reserves and ghettos for
Palestinians and the
expropriation of land and property belonging to
Palestinians include
the historical case of the colonization of 78% of
historic Palestine in
1948, settlement of additional Palestinian land in the

West Bank and
Gaza since 1967 and most recently through the
annexation of another 15%
of the West Bank through the Apartheid Wall.

(e) Exploitation of the labour of the members of a
racial group or
groups, in particular by submitting them to forced
labour
For example, Moshe Dayan’s description of the forced
displacement of
Bedouins and the theft of their farm land for the
purpose of creating
an “urban proletariat”.

(f) Persecution of organizations and persons, by
depriving them of
fundamental rights and freedoms, because they oppose
apartheid.
Persecution of Palestinian organizations and
Palestinian people on both
sides of the Green Line by depriving them of
fundamental rights and
freedoms because they oppose Apartheid. As in the
case of Azmi
Bishara, an elected member of the Knesset who was
placed under house
arrest for campaigning against the separation of
citizenship and
nationality rights. Still other examples include the
imprisonment of
members of the political group Abnaa al Balad within
the Green Line, as
well as members of the PFLP (Popular Front for the
Liberation of
Palestine, Hamas, and other groups who explicity
oppose the Israeli
state)

Read More (5 comments)

Proposal for anti GM Foods Initiative
Friday April 01, @11:24PM by Jen Mazer and Owen Broadhurst
This is a proposal for the Green-Rainbow Party to spearhead an initiative for a ban on genetically
engineered foods in the whole state of Massachusetts, or in Middlesex, Hampden, or whatever county wants to do this.
Read More

Proposal for anti GM Foods Initiative
Friday April 01, @11:23PM by Jen Mazer and Owen Broadhurst
This is a proposal for the Green-Rainbow Party to spearhead an initiative for a ban on genetically
engineered foods in the whole state of Massachusetts, or in Middlesex, Hampden, or whatever county wants to do this.
Read More

Position on "fusion" voting
Friday April 01, @09:27PM by Owen Broadhurst, Jen Mazer, and Rich Zitola
This is a resubmission of this proposal, which Statecom failed to address at the last meeting. I've incorporated David Rolde's amendment, which makes the text more technically accurate. The background is very long, but the proposal text itself is very short. -Rich

---

Although this topic has been the subject of debate for quite some time,
immediate action via this proposal was inspired by the recent discussion
on Boston Indymedia. In light of proposed legislation, it seems
appropriate for the party to take an offical stance on "fusion" voting,
where political parties are given the option of nominating candidates
from other parties. I suggest that the GRP stand in opposition to fusion
voting on the grounds that it will lead to fewer choices for voters,
being therefore incompatible with the principles of true democracy.


Original article:
---------------
"Proposed bill would allow two parties to endorse the same candidate,
giving voters more choices"
by Rand Wilson
Email: rand (nospam) mindspring.com (unverified)
Phone: 617 989-8045
Address: 21 Fellows Street, Boston, MA 02119 08 Dec 2004

A bill proposing to repeal the Commonwealth's ban on "cross endorsement"
voting was filed in the House of Representatives on December 1. It is
titled "An Act Providing Voters with More Ballot Choices."

Lifting the ban would allow two political parties to nominate and vote
for the same candidate. This type of voting helps minor parties to build
their strength, while avoiding the common pitfalls of the
winner-take-all, two-party system. Supporters of a minor political
party's platform are often reluctant to waste their vote on a candidate
with no chance of winning - or in a close vote - inadvertently defeating
the major party candidate who more nearly shares their views.

"Many voters are dissatisfied with the choice of candidates offered in
elections. The current law relegates independent candidates and third
parties to the role of spoilers and citizens who support them too often
end up wasting their votes," said State Representative Patricia Jehlen
who sponsored the bill. "Repealing the state's ban on cross-endorsement
allows new parties to present additional choices and permits voters to
make their voices heard while still having their votes count for a
viable candidate."

Current co-sponsors include Representatives Byron Rushing, Anne Paulsen,
Ellen Story, Benjamin Swan and Senator Robert L. Hedlund. More
legislators are expected to co-sponsor prior to the Dec. 15 deadline.

Supporters of the cross endorsement legislation believe that it would
make Massachusetts elections more competitive and draw more voters into
the political process. Many labor unions and community organizations are
particularly supportive because the measure would allow minor parties to
hold major party candidates more accountable to their issues.

Minor political parties have been endorsing major party candidates in
New York for many years and have recently revived the practice in
Connecticut. Five other states also permit it.

The bill is backed by "More Choices, More Voices" a campaign group that
includes a dozen Massachusetts labor organizations and the Boston-based
community groups ACORN and City Life/Vida Urbana.

Copies of the legislation may be obtained from Rep. Jehlen at the
statehouse (617-722-2676) or from Rand Wilson at the above number.

# # #

[Editor's addition- Here is the bill verbatim!]

PETITIONERS:
Byron Rushing 9th Suffolk
Anne Paulsen 24th Middlesex
Ellen Story 3rd Hampshire
Robert L. Hedlund Plymouth/Norfolk
Benjamin Swan 11th Hampden

AN ACT AN ACT PROVIDING VOTERS WITH MORE BALLOT CHOICES

PREAMBLE: The people of Massachusetts expect and are entitled to
meaningful participation in the Commonwealth’s system of democracy,
based on the principle that all people have an equal say in the outcomes
of elections. Many voters are dissatisfied with the choice of candidates
offered in elections. The current law relegates independent candidates
and third parties to the role of spoilers and citizens who support them
too often end up wasting their votes. Repealing the State’s ban on
cross-endorsement allows new parties to present additional choices and
permits voters to make their voices heard while still having their votes
counted for a viable candidate.

SECTION 1:
Section 6 of chapter 53 of the General Laws, as appearing in the 2002
Official Edition, is hereby amended by striking out the second
paragraph. Section 48 of said chapter 53, as so appearing is hereby
amended by striking out the fourth paragraph.

SECTION 2:
Section 41 of chapter 54 of the General Laws, as appearing in the 2002
Official Edition, is hereby amended by striking out the fourth, fifth,
and sixth paragraphs and inserting in place thereof the following
paragraphs:
If a candidate shall receive the nomination of more than one party or
more than one political designation for the same office, the candidate’s
name shall appear once for each party or political designation received.
The candidate shall specify the order in which the party or political
designations will appear, provided that all parties shall be listed
before all political designations. The ballot shall allow voters to
select a candidate nominated by multiple parties or political
designations under the party or political designation ballot line of
their choice.

If technology allows, voting machines shall prevent a voter from voting
more than the number of times permitted for any one office. If a voter
votes for the same candidate for the same office on multiple party or
political designation lines, the ballot shall remain valid and shall be
counted as if the duplicate votes were a single vote for the candidate
on a line without a party or political designation.

When elections are held for a full term and a partial term of the same
office running concurrently, no person shall have their name printed on
the official ballot or on ballot labels for both the election to fill
the full term and the election to fill the partial term.

SECTION 3:
Section 13 of chapter 54 of the General Laws, as appearing in the 2000
Official Edition, is hereby amended by inserting after “within the time
prescribed by section eleven for filing objections to certificates of
nomination and nomination papers” the following words: "or within six
days following any party’s primary elections with respect to the office,
regardless of whether the candidate sought nomination or was nominated
in such primary."




My response:
--------------

Re: Proposed bill would allow two parties to endorse the same candidate,
giving voters more choices
by Rich Zitola
rich (nospam) massirv.org (unverified) 24 Dec 2004

Fusion is a terrible idea for one simple reason: in reality, it gives
voters FEWER choices. For example, last November we had four parties and
four candidates, i.e. _four_ choices. If we had fusion, and the greens
nominated Kerry and the libertarians nominated Bush, we would have had
_two_ choices. It's that simple. Fusion leads to fewer choices.

The argument that fusion would allow third party voters to vote for a
major party candidate but stay in their own party is extremely weak at
best, misleading at worst. Let's say Kerry got 30% of his votes on the
Dem line and 70% of his votes on the Green line. Could you then conclude
that Kerry represents green values better than dem values? Of course
not. It would be misleading... here's an example: Kerry supports the
death penalty, greens strongly oppose it, dems waffle. In the case where
the split was 30/70 as I mentioned, undoubtedly someone would argue that
Kerry's strong support among greens indicates that most greens actually
support the death penalty. This muddies the waters even more, leads us
to fight amongst ourselves, and the result is the republicans win.

Even if we did accept the argument that fusion would still allow two
candidates to be considered "four choices" it still doesn't give us more
choices, as advertised. In that case we go from four to, um, "four".
Strike two.

Finally, any potential success of fusion depends heavily on the premise
that people actually would nominate candidates in other parties, based
on the argument that they are more "electable". If that person actually
felt that candidate genuinely reflected their values they would switch
parties themselves! A green member who was truly enthralled with Kerry
would most likely become a dem!

So even if we were to buy the argument that fusion will work because
people will compromise their values to support someone more "electable",
it leads us to the doomsday scenario: In 2008 the republicans nominate
Cheney. The dems, in desperation, go beyond the Gore/Kerry threshold of
"electability" and nominate... McCAIN!!! Fusion would then give us the
utopian vision of being able to vote for a republican as a republican, a
dem, or a green. How nice.

For all the reasons above, fusion is short-sighted, dangerous, and
anti-democratic. IRV is the only way to achieve the goal of re-uniting
progressives and finally put an end to the self-destructive bickering
the goes on between greens and progressive dems, while at the same time
genuinely giving voters a broader range of real choices on the ballot.

I hope you will all support the upcoming IRV campaign. I haven't updated
the MassIRV site since the Election Laws Committee hearing last
September, but things are brewing once again. Please keep an eye on
www.massirv.org for the latest news... January will be exciting!

-Rich Zitola
co-founder, MassIRV
former Green-Rainbow candidate for State Senate

---


Read More (3 comments)

Open GPUS SC Balloting by GPUS CC representatives
Wednesday March 30, @03:06AM by Owen R. Broadhurst
Background (from the Louisiana Green Party):

BACKGROUND:

Even though SC elections have been conducted a particular way in the past, there is no language that specifies either open or secret ballots for
elections in the GPUS bylaws. The proposal addresses that lack of a clear policy and calls for open ballots in the interest of transparency and accountability.
Read More (2 comments)

endorsement committee proposal
Wednesday March 23, @03:01PM by Jon Levy and Wanda Boeke
from the State Committee committee.
See Attachment
Read More (3 comments)

Automatic Resignation from State Committee
Sunday March 06, @09:03PM by Nashua River Green-Rainbow Local
The purpose of this proposal is to establish a process for the automatic resigantion of State Committee members who no longer actively fulfill the duties of that position. Specific circumstances include but are not limited to: members who have moved out of state, those who have been absent for a long period of time, and those whom the state party has lost contact.

This will allow for immediate removal and open the seat up for others who are active in their region.
Read More (1 comment)