2008 PUBLIC POLICY QUESTION CAMPAIGN
Sunday January 13, @06:34PM, by Mike Heichman, Suffolk County
Subject : 2008 PUBLIC POLICY QUESTION CAMPAIGN
from the CDLC dept.
Summary :
Background:

Earlier this year Ron Francis had initiated an exploration to see if there were interest from GRP members across the state to see whether or not we could find an agreement on one state legislative advisory question for the 2008 elections. It was his thinking that this would be a good way to identify the party with an issue across the state while building the party at the local level.

I have always thought that Ron’s proposal was a good one that deserved pursuing. In early December, Ron sent me a message about his campaign. He told me that 8 GRP members had attended meetings and they had explored 2 separate questions (reparations and IRV). Additionally he informed me that there was someone from Southeastern MA who was interested in a marijuana ballot question.

Recently Ron moved out of the state. While he was not optimistic that we would succeed in uniting behind one issue this year, I have decided to pursue it to see if there is interest in this project for 2008.

As of this date, I do not see any electoral interest except for the presidential campaign. I do not know of any GRP member who has either decided to run for the U.S. Senate, for Congress or for the State Legislature. I hope that I am wrong and that other members of the party have good news that they will soon share. If that is the case and a number of our members are interested in running for those offices, I would no longer be interested in an advisory ballot question campaign for 2008.

However, at this point in time, I believe that a more likely scenario would be that we would have only a few or NO GRP candidates running for the above offices this year.

Research:

The Secretary of the Commonwealth had produced a document for the “2006 Public Policy Question Petitions”. (You can get it from their website: http://www.sec.state.ma.us/ELE/eleidx.htm and in the right column, download the PDF, “How to Place a Public Policy Question on the 2006 State Election Ballot). I am confident that they will soon create an updated document for the 2008 elections. In the meantime, there is sufficient information to plan our 2008 campaign. We would not be able to begin collecting signatures until mid-April and would have until early July to gather the signatures. We would need 1200 valid signatures from any registered voter for a state senatorial district and only 200 for a state representative district.

According to the document, “Generally, public policy questions involve a determination of what governmental action is desirable or necessary for the public interest. The question must be fit for legislative action. It must provide a legislator with an instruction or direction regarding governmental action.”

The following format should be used, “Shall the (senator or representative) from this district be instructed to vote in favor of legislation (describe the legislation you wish to be enacted)?”

Why One Question:

I believe that there are a few major advantages of uniting behind one question:

For each question, I believe a separate campaign committee would have to be created. Each would have to have a Treasurer and file campaign finance reports. It would be much easier to organize one statewide campaign. I believe that it would be easier to raise finances for one project. By focusing our limited resources on one question we will be in better shape to organize a major campaign.


Text :
Proposal/Timeline:

January 27, 2008:

1. Members of the State Committee will be asked if they know of anybody who has decided to run for the above offices or is considering being a candidate.
2. The State Comm. will decide to put out the word to our local chapters and through other means of communication with our membership to encourage our fellow members to run for office in 2008. We will also use the upcoming regional meetings for this purpose, the GRP website, e-mail communication, etc.
3. If the State Committee believes that there is a good chance that there will be few GRP members running for the above offices in 2008, it will authorize the CDLC to set up an “Advisory Ballot Question Task Force”, open, of course to all GRP members.

If the above is passed by the January 27 State Comm. Meeting:

February-Early April:

1. CDLC will publicize and organize the Task Force.
2. We will ask the Regional Meetings to discuss this idea.
3. We will contact Local Chapters and ask them to discuss this idea, as well as encouraging them to run candidates.
4. We will solicit ideas for potential ballot question.
5. If support develops for a very small number of issues, we will do some initial outreach to local and statewide groups who might be interested in working with us.
6. The Task Force will become knowledgeable about the appropriate campaign laws.
7. If sufficient support develops for a very small number of issues, the Task Force will come up with a plan and make a proposal for the April State Comm. meeting

April State Comm. Meeting: We will decide whether we will proceed with this project.

April-July:

1. Establish the legal committee

2. Organizing at the local, regional and statewide level

a. Outreach to GRP Members
b. Outreach to other groups and individuals who might be interested in working with us on this campaign.

2. Organize a Statewide Committee and Local Groups

a. draft literature
b. raise funds
c. collect signatures

July-Election Day:

1. Intensive outreach to the community
2. Discussion of future work (building and strengthening of local chapters; coalition work)
3. Fundraising









Reply

• Re: 2008 PUBLIC POLICY QUESTION CAMPAIGN
  Thursday January 17, @02:55PM, by Mike Heichman
  > Proposal/Timeline:
  >
  > January 27, 2008:
  >
  > 1. Members of the State Committee will be asked if they know of anybody who has decided to run for the above offices or is considering being a candidate.
  > 2. The State Comm. will decide to put out the word to our local chapters and through other means of communication with our membership to encourage our fellow members to run for office in 2008. We will also use the upcoming regional meetings for this purpose, the GRP website, e-mail communication, etc.
  > 3. If the State Committee believes that there is a good chance that there will be few GRP members running for the above offices in 2008, it will authorize the CDLC to set up an “Advisory Ballot Question Task Force”, open, of course to all GRP members.
  ***
  Mike,
  
  It seems to me that this proposal consists of 2 proposals: encouraging candidates + organizing & delivering a ballot question.
  
  No. 3 puts these two activities at loggerheads, as I am understanding it. Years in which we have candidates, those candidates need all the help they can get (from signature-gathering to fundraising to campaigning) and then some.
  
  The effort for one or more campaigns is considerable. The same kind of energy is needed to organize a ballot question or referendum (signature-gathering in each district, recruiting volunteers in each district, campaigning & some fundraising). The state allows 3 questions/referendums to appear on a ballot - the first 3 to come in and be approved will be on a ballot (and then, only in the districts for which successful timely application was made and where sufficient certified signatures were gathered). A statewide effort for all districts is a considerable undertaking (recall clean elections efforts, get Mass. military out of Iraq, etc.).
  
  In order not to keep splitting our energies, I think it important to focus either on a candidate/candidate campaign or to focus on a ballot question/referendum.
  
  Am I understanding your proposal correctly (that you support doing a ballot question when one or more candidates is running)? If it is, I believe the proposal would do better as a proposal to involve the membership and do outreach to get behind a ballot question/referendum when candidates are not running, rather than when they are running.
  
  Wanda
  
  
  Reply
  
  
• Re: 2008 PUBLIC POLICY QUESTION CAMPAIGN
  Monday January 21, @06:16PM, by John Andrews
  I don't think that we have an abundance of Party-level resources to put into ballot campaigns. The resources and the enthusiasm has to come mostly from the GRP locals. So I would like to make sure that locals are involved in selecting the ballot question. If a local decides to concentrate instead on working on behalf of a local GRP candidate, then that would be a perfectly understandable choice. Either focus would benefit the Party.
  Reply
  
  
• Re: 2008 PUBLIC POLICY QUESTION CAMPAIGN
  Monday January 21, @07:40PM, by Mike Heichman, Suffolk County
  > I don't think that we have an abundance of Party-level resources to put into ballot campaigns. The resources and the enthusiasm has to come mostly from the GRP locals. So I would like to make sure that locals are involved in selecting the ballot question. If a local decides to concentrate instead on working on behalf of a local GRP candidate, then that would be a perfectly understandable choice. Either focus would benefit the Party.
  
  -----------------------
  Thanks you Wanda and John for your feedback.
  
  Your feedback makes me think that I haven't bee clear with my proposal or if it is clear, it has been misundertood by both of you.
  
  I will therefore try to be more clear.
  
  1. I would much prefer that this year we have at least a moderate number of candidates who are running for the US Senate, Congress or the state legilature. If that would be the case, I would NOT be submitting this proposal.
  
  2. As of now I know of no member of our party who is considering for the above offices. I will ask at the State Comm. meeting on 1-27 if anyone knows of any member who is running for actively considering running.
  
  3. If it looks on January 27 that we will have very few or no candidates running this year for the above offices, I am submitting this proposal to be our electoral focus.
  
  Mike Heichman
  
  Reply
  
  
• Re: 2008 PUBLIC POLICY QUESTION CAMPAIGN
  Saturday January 26, @10:48PM, by bill cunningham
  (1) This proposal is about working on a nonbinding advisory question. If an already-popular issue is chosen, winning a nonbinding poll is meaningless. If a is a difficult issue is chosen, winning is — difficult.
  
  Here I go asking those same two questions again: How will this initiative help the people? and How will it build the party?
  
  Ron made his proposal based on his experience with the Somerville Divestment Project (SDP). SDP ran for more than three years, raising and spending more than the State GRP budget each year. I am not aware of any organizational gains from that work.
  
  (2) There are three binding questions on the statewide ballot this year. CHLC should encourage and offer support to GRP members who are able and willing to plug into those issues. Given our organizational strength this is about all we will be able to manage well.
  
  It is beyond me why we HAVE to do electoral work every year. Are we addicted to this stuff?
  
  
  Reply
  
  



---

Contact the tech team with suggestions/corrections for this site.
About This Site