Green Party of the United States - National Committee Voting

Home	Vote	Results	History	Contacts	Admin
	National Committee Voting

Login

Proposal Details

Proposal ID	618
Proposal	GPUS Delegate Apportionment 2011
Presenter	Maine Green Independent Party
Floor Manager	Leenie Halbert
Phase	Closed
Discussion	08/16/2011 - 09/04/2011
Voting	09/05/2011 - 09/11/2011
Result	Failed
Presens Quorum	31 0.6666
Consens Quorum	80 0.6666 of Yes and No Votes

Background

The goals of the Maine proposal are:

1) to provide an option markedly different than the other apportionment
proposals. Many delegates have stated that the DAC and the Illinois
proposals and the existing model are similar.

2) to steer apportionment away from many of the current and proposed
complexities to an easy to administer, more objective model.

3) to provide a smaller NC.

4) to abolish the apportionment committees and their rules to improve
GPUS operational efficiency.

This apportionment is based on population and "notable achievement."
Maine contends that there is no way to achieve complete fairness and
that making longer and more complex rules does not help the GPUS.
Sometimes the way out of hopeless complexity is to go simple. Maine
perceives that the technical and formulaic intricacies of the incumbent,
previous and other proposed apportionments and the committees and
lengthy rules they spawn as alienating to many delegates. We conclude it
doesn't have to be that way. We want to see all the numbers crunching,
formulas and complexities go into the campaigns and politics of our
respective states and districts, not here in the GPUS where it has had
no perceivable benefit.

Other benefits of the Maine proposal are:

- That it will significantly reduce the length of GPUS rules documents
by eliminating the committees and rules related to the present
apportionment.

- It will reduce the burden of work on the SC and NC. We note that the
DAC committee page on the GPUS website was outdated by four years with
co-chairs years gone. This and other outdated and unused rules sections
show that GPUS efficiency can benefit from the Maine apportionment proposal.

The only part of our proposed apportionment that is subjective is the
"notable achievement" bonus. Currently we have allocated these bonuses
to states we believe are uncontroversial in somehow being "notable,"
namely, CA, CO, CT, IL, ME, MD, MA, MN, NY, OR, PA, VA and WI. We have
made this intentionally subjective because every state is different and
in some states what may be notable may be less so in another state. We
expect the NC to be the final arbiter of what is and is not a "notable"
state. With only one extra delegate on the line, we should be able to
avoid overly contentious debates. We look forward to seeing this bonus
conferred to many more states!

The rest of the apportionment is population based, as that is the only
objective measure available to us. To balance this with the fact that it
is not a perfect proxy for power in the GPUS, we have minimized the
effect of population, without ignoring it completely. With one delegate
per every 5 million of population and a minimum of two delegates per
state or caucus, all states get 2 delegates on population except CA (7),
FL (3), NY (3), and TX (4). So population matters, but it's not an
overwhelming advantage to larger states. See the link to the specific
state-by-state and caucus apportionment in the Reference Section below.

Proposal

The entirety of Article VIII in the GPUS Rules and Procedures will be
replaced with the following language:

ARTICLE VIII. NATIONAL COMMITTEE SIZE AND DELEGATE APPORTIONMENT

Section 8-1. Size and Apportionment of the National Committee

8-1.1. The National Committee will consist of 114 Delegates as specified
in the spreadsheet linked under References.

8-1.2. State and Caucus delegations will be determined as follows:

8-1.3. Allocate to each state one delegate per every 5,000,000 of
population, rounded down, with a minimum delegation of 2 delegates for
every state. The most recent Census data shall be used as it becomes
available.

8-1.4. States shall be able to be awarded with an additional delegate
for "notable achievement." This shall be awarded to, or removed from a
state only once in a any two year period, by action of the National
Committee. Any state or caucus may submit a proposal to the National
Committee nominating itself or any other state or caucus for a change in
"notable achievement" status.

8-1.5. Accredited Caucuses are allocated two delegates.

8-1.6. States and accredited Caucuses are entitled to one Alternate
Delegate for each Delegate.

8-1.7. Article VIII may itself be amended only in odd years.

Resources

Implementation/Timeline/Resources: Rules and Procedures change would
become effective upon passage.

References

Apportionment Spreadsheet
http://www.gp.org/committees/apportionment/documents/GPUSMEApportionment2011.pdf

Population by state, 4/1/2010
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_population

Contact - Morgen D'Arc (207) 761-7797 morgen.darc@gmail.com
Rob Brown, (207) 939-4202 rhakka@gmail.com
Anna Trevorrow (207) 370-7579 ajtrev@gwi.net
Anthony Zeli, mainegreen.tony@gmail.com

Questions about this system?
Contact the Voting Admin.
The Green Party of the United States voting system is free software, licensed under the GNU General Public License (GPL).
You can download a copy here.
To independently verify a ranked choice vote, or for information about how that works, go to Jonathan Lundell's Voting Page and upload the ballot file from the ranked choice vote result page. JL's ranked choice module is licensed under an alternate free software license.

Green Party of the United States