Voting has begun this week on four proposals before the GPUS National Committee, and official discussion has begun on one more. There could be some exciting and interesting discussion on the National Committee lists about a few of these, namely voting online for Steering Committee Officers, the resolution affirming opposition to the death penalty, and in the queue a resolution declaring the International Committee “inactive until committee Rules, Policies & Procedures are adopted”.
We are trying something new on Green Party Watch – embedding polls into the post so that you can chime in both in the comments and on the poll! (note: online polls are not scientific and very little in terms of security is in place, much like our presidential elections in America)
Prop 382: Resolution Against the Death Penalty
Yes, the Green Party already opposes the death penalty. This resolution is in response to the Green Party of Mexico, El Partido Verde Ecologista de México (PVEM), which has been publicly advocating a return to the death penalty as part of an anti-kidnapping campaign in Mexico. This is actually not as simple as it might seem, there are complexities of the international Green movement involved as well as complexities within the Federación de Partidos Verdes de las Américas (FPVA), and the role of the GPUS International Committee within the FPVA. European Greens recently issued a strong condemnation of the Mexico Greens, and this Resolution, which did not come from the GPUS International Committee but the Green Party of California, appears to be echoing that sentiment. However there is concern that the language of the resolution is not very diplomatic. One Delegate wrote: “In sum, our relationship with the Mexican Green Ecologist Party is more deeply-rooted and complex, than suggested by the somewhat condescending, judgmental tone of Resolution 382.” The International Committee is apparently considering a better worded resolution than this one. The vote on this resolution will likely be closer than one might think, and I suspect it might fail.
Prop 383: Election of the Officers of the GPUS by Online Elections
Under current practice the Officers of the GPUS, including Secretary, Treasurer, and Steering Committee members, are elected by National Committee Delegates present at the Annual National Meeting, with each delegate present allowed to cast one proxy vote for an absent delegate. This proposal would be a bylaws change that would allow for all National Committee Delegates both present and absent to vote for the GPUS officers online the same way that Delegates currently vote for resolutions such as this one. One concern about this resolution is that it may make the Annual National Meeting “irrelevant” or indirectly reduce the number of delegates that will travel to North Carolina for the 2009 ANM. However if passed it will allow the entire National Committee to vote on the leadership of GPUS rather than only those who could make it to North Carolina this July. I expect this will pass.
Prop 384 & Prop 385: Green House Campaign Committee and Green Senate Campaign Committee Election Revote
These two propositions are back on the voting docket after failing earlier due to a lack of a quorum. Seven candidates for the Senate CC are on the ballot to fill seven seats; 3 candidates for the House CC are on the ballot to fill 9 seats. The candidates are all the same as the previous vote. The House Committee will hopefully be able to fill the rest of their seats soon, assuming these two props pass this time. The House Committee has the potential to be really exciting. I expect these to pass.
Discussion Phase: Prop 386: Declare International Committee Inactive Until Committee RPPs are Approved
This proposition, presented by the Green Party of California, is going to result in a lot of dirty laundry fluttering in the wind. The International Committee apparently pre-dates GPUS and has long operated under pre-GPUS rules and procedures. The International Committee is also apparently one of the more active and cohesive committees given its long history and relatively consistent membership over the years. There has been pressure on the International Committee to submit updated Rules & Procedures to the National Committee for approval but it has never done so. It looks like it will likely do so now very soon. However, complicating things is the fact that the BRPP (Bylaws, etc) Committee is currently re-writing the International Committee’s Rules for them, and not with their permission. It is looking like the BRPP vs International Committee in a cage match with the Steering Committee as Referee and the National Committee as judges. The International Committee just elected new co-chairs in the last several weeks and is expected to be taking on its own Rules shortly. It could be a race to the finish line.
And all of these interesting subjects will make for a not-boring week for the National Committee.