Green Party of California
for Member, Delegation to Green Party of the United States
January 19th, 2008
Name - Cat
County - Marin
Contact information - (415) 897-6989; firstname.lastname@example.org
When I ran for GPUS National Committee delegate 2 years ago, I pledged
to work to improve democratic standards within the GPUS and to get
the GPUS to formally discard its disastrous Safe States Strategy
of 2004 (which has cost the California Green Party 17% of our membership
since our peak in 2003) and to affirm its right and duty to threaten
and make demands of the corporate-funded parties. I stated, "These
2 issues are currently connected, with California's membership remaining
disenfranchized as part of an overall trend of capitulation to the
ploys of the Democrats. If this trend wins out, I believe the democratic
issues will be moot, because the party will die as utterly irrelevant."
I have kept my promises in working for those goals. For two solid
years, I spent an unbelievable number of hours working for more proportional
representation of the membership, as mandated by a 70% vote of the
National Committee. I'm proud to say that we won some victories,
although I think we ultimately lost the war. The GPUS in the end
rejected its own mandate. (See http://darksidegp.blogspot.com/2007/12/gpus-rejects-democracy.html
for gory details). But no one can say we didn't give our all to every
last chance. I still hope the victories will become seeds for better
democratic standards in the future.
I also co-authored a national proposal (#218) to formally discard
the Safe States Strategy and to acknowledge that one of our main
purposes as a political party is to pose an electoral challenge to
the corporate agenda promoted by the two corporate parties, the Democrats
and Republicans. This proposal passed with 80% approval in 2006.
While this did not eliminate the trend toward political cowardice
in the party, it at least drove that trend underground and allowed
the national party to frame the terms of the 2008 presidential race
without the interminable, ineffectual waffling of 2003 and 2004.
Our work in the Presidential Campaign Support Committee would have
been severely hampered without the passage of that proposal (see
http://gp.org/cgi-bin/vote/propdetail?pid=218 for text).
I have kept my commitments to the principles and constituency I represent.
I have often put more into it than I had to give. I can't count the
number of all-nighters I've invested into this struggle.
I run for re-election now with a slightly different pledge. If elected,
I promise to continue to represent the causes of fair representation,
accountability, and a strong electoral strategy independent of the
corporate parties. I promise to do so until I no longer choose to
tolerate all the contradictions, betrayals, hypocrisy and character
assassination involved in doing so. I promise to take care of myself
in the process. And if I assess that the time has come where further
investment of time and energy amounts to "throwing good money
after bad," I pledge to resign and allow you to elect a new
representative of our constituency.
Meanwhile, for 2008, I pledge to keep my eyes on the prize of a strong
presidential campaign against the war. The country needs this desperately.
The presidential race establishes the spectrum of political debate
for the whole country and yet the view of 70% of citizens is essentially
excluded from public consideration. The one worthwhile thing we could
accomplish this year as a political party is to unite behind the
strongest possible anti-war campaign. If nothing else, we have a
duty now to be AS VISIBLE AS WE CAN in challenging the pro-war, anti-liberty