Green-Rainbow Party of Massachusetts

Return to Top Level

Sunset Provision
Sunday January 13, @09:27PM, by Nat Fortune, Merelice, MIke Heichman
Subject : keeping party statements of policy current through periodic review
from the Platform dept.
Summary :
This proposal adds a sunset provision to party statements of policy. The goal is to ensure a periodic review of existing and future statements ensure that they remain up to date and continue to reflect the current thinking of the party.

This proposal received approval for expedited treatment during the Nov 2007 state com meeting but was not acted upon before time ran out.

Text :
To ensure that party statements of policy retain their currency and continue to reflect the current thinking of the party, state committee adopts the following rules:

All party statements of policy must include a date of passage.

Party statements of policy automatically expire 3 years after passage unless explicitly reviewed and renewed by state committee.

Party statements may be renewed as is, renewed after revisions, or left to expire.

Party statements of policy already more than 3 years old are deemed to have expired upon passage of this proposal and require reconsideration prior to renewal.

Already expired statements will be automatically resubmitted for comment, revision, and re-adoption.

The review process begins with consideration of the statement of policy by the platform committee. The platform committee is expected to solicit and consider recommendations from other relevant working committees and subcommittees.

The administrative committee is expected to keep the platform committee appraised of statements of policy requiring reconsideration during the coming year.

Following endorsement by the platform committee, updated statements of policy may be submitted for endorsement by state committee through the standard state committee proposal process.

If the platform committee considers the renewal to be routine, it may also request that the administration committee approve the updated statements of policy on an expedited basis.

State committee retains its current right to further review and revise any such statements of policy.

Reply

Re: Sunset Provision
Wednesday January 16, @10:16PM, by Nat Fortune
Existing statements ---including older statements now or soon to be more than three years old --- that would be affected by this proposal can be found on the Learn More page.
Reply

Reply to Sunset Provision
Sunday January 20, @09:36AM, by bill cunningham
> Existing statements ---including older statements now or soon to be more than three years old --- that would be affected by this proposal can be found on the Learn More page.

This proposal refers to "party statements of policy." But it does not define that term. The GRP website contains a list of documents, on the main page and the "read more" page. Not every document is titled as "statement." Some documents are titled as "press release," "endorsement," "letter," or "platform."

The titles are not systematic but arbitrary. For example, the 2004 DNC "statement" is really more of a press release. Any reader can see that it is not current. The Palestine "statement" is a party position because it is current. Any reader can see that it refers to an ongoing situation. (Any reader who has the code to open the document, that is!)

A party positions is, in effect, an addition to the party platform. The process for adopting a party position is completely different from the process for issuing a press release or endorsement of someone else's position.

If StateCom has the power or right to sunset a position adopted by Convention, does it also have the power or right to reinstate or revise such a position? This proposal assumes that StateCom does have that power and right. Is there any precedent or rule to justify this?

Does the sunset apply to every policy document on the page or only those with the formal title "statement"? If it applies to all, that would sink the existing State platform, which is more than three years old. If it applies only to formally titled "documents" then it is as arbitrary as the titles themselves.

It appears that there are only five policy documents on the GRP website which are more than three years old. They are the statements on Sudan, Palestine and Iraq (for some reason Iraq isn't actually on the page), the DNC press release "statement" and the party platform.

I ask that the sponsors clarify their intent by clarifying the language of their proposal.
Reply

Re: Sunset Provision
Monday January 21, @05:55PM, by John Andrews
Our Platform is out of date and effectively inoperative. The Platform Committee decided not to take on the major work of bringing it up to date all at once. But in effect the passage of position-setting proposals by State Committee is updating our positions in a case-by-case manner, hopefully starting with issues that are most urgent to party-building and successful outreach.

There is currently no process for requiring that any position be kept current. We ask that candidates support the platform and then hand them position statements that are obsolete and which are not well-supported by the State Committee or the membership. Our political opponents then dig into our positions and try to exploit any flaws. This isn't a healthy situation. We need to periodically reendorse or update our positions to make sure they say what we mean and what we believe. In my judgment, having a more focused set of positions that we can defend is better than having a large set of positions that include obsolete statements or statements that we cannot defend as being correct. This proposal seems to have the right intent - to keep our positions current.

Reply

Re: Sunset Provision
Thursday January 24, @06:53PM, by bill cunningham
John seems to be saying that he takes the sunset proposal to include the whole existing party platform.

The sunset proposal's three sponsors have not said anything.

Reply