Green Party of the United States - National Committee Voting

Home	Vote	Results	History	Contacts	Admin
	National Committee Voting

Login

Proposal Details

Proposal ID	151
Proposal	Voting Process at the Annual National Meeting in Tulsa to Increase Inclusion and Ensure Sound Policy
Presenter	Green Parties of Maine, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Iowa, Hawai'i, and Georgia
Floor Manager	Greg Gerritt
Phase	Closed - Failed
Discussion	06-27-2005 - 07-11-2005
Voting	07-12-2005 - 07-19-2005
Presens Quorum	Two Thirds of Active Accredited States/Caucuses
Consens Quorum	Two Thirds of Yes and No Votes

Background

Originally Submitted June 17, 2005 Revised June 23, 2005

Some GPUS National Committee delegates and alternates are unable
to get to Annual National Meetings due to finances, conflicting
schedules, inability to get time away from work, disability,
health and other reasons. This should not exclude them from the
process of being informed, being able to discuss and vote on
important GPUS decisions and carrying out their state's
responsibility and interest in the GPUS.

Some states do not have alternates. Delegates will not be able to
carry the one proxie they could in former years.

The National Committee meetings at the Annual National Meetings
tend to be large, fairly chaotic and sporadically attended.
Delegates bustle into the room and leave again, there is much
coming and going, delegates have other National Annual Meeting
obligations, there often is conflicting scheduling, and votes are
missed as a consequence. It is also difficult to hear or see all
of the proceedings, discussions are difficult, often they are not
thorough enough, and it happens that proposals and policy may be
done hastily or not well.

Many concerns are not addressed due to lack of time. Minutes
taken have been lost, not completed or do not accurately reflect
proceedings.

These hindrances to serious democratic dialogue are especially to
be avoided in the case of decisions with potential for
considerable controversy. The factors cited diminish the ability
of the GPUS to guarantee the degree of fairness, transparency,
democracy, participation and inclusion that we do have available
to us. It is available with the on-line discussion and web voting process
employed during the rest of the year.

Full participation, inclusion, accurate information, the
opportunity to discuss and vote on proposals by all GPUS
delegates and appropriate alternates are vital to democracy in
the GPUS.

Proposal

To insure maximum inclusion and participation of delegates and
appropriate alternates in GPUS decisions, formal discussion and
votes on proposals of the National Committee at the Annual
National Meeting in Tulsa such as but not restricted to relating
to bylaws, rules, policy, procedure, organizational structure,
actions, large money requests, proposals that are controversial,
confusing or complex, and other important proposals shall be
conducted on the voting page.

Votes at the annual meeting in Tulsa will deal with topics
relating to the convention itself or proposals with a high
potential for consensus.

High potential for consensus may be tested by the use of a straw
poll. Any proposal that results in less than two-thirds shall not be
voted on in Tulsa. Any proposal that is not related to the
convention that proceeds with controversy and/or confusion in
spite of it previously being judged as having high consensus
potential, will be referred by the facilitator to the voting page
to be carried out.

Resources

Voting page. Discussion list.

References

Listserv archives. Voting Page.

Contacts:
Morgen D'Arc, Maine, morgenizer@yahoo.com John Rensenbrink,
Maine, rensen@gwi.com Greg Gerritt, Rhode Island,
gerritt@mindspring.com Tom Sevigny, Connecticut,
capeconn@comcast.net Larry Orr, Iowa, elkentor@fastmail.fm Julie
Jacobson, Hawai'i, jacobs@hgea.org Nan Garrett, Georgia,
nannetteg@yahoo.com

The voting software used by the Green Party of the United States is free software, licensed under the General Public License v2 (GPL).