[NV Greens] Platform Committee Report to the GPUS CC at the 2004 National Convention

[Barb Ewing]

 FROM:  REPORT from the GPUS PLATFORM COMMITTEE, June 2004
>> June 14, 2004
>>
>>
>> The recent posting of the 2004 Draft Platform and information and 
>> instructions
>> currently being distributed to all national convention delegates, 
>> represents
>> the near-culmination of nearly two years of work updating, expanding and
>> revising the Green Platform.
>>
>> The Green Platform is a consensus document that represents to Greens and 
>> the
>> general public the policy on which most Greens reasonably agree, and 
>> provides
>> the basis for a Green presidential campaign.
>>
>> The task of the Platform Committee is to develop, implement and 
>> facilitate a
>> process for Platform development and revision that is accessible to all
>> interested Greens, importantly, encourages as many Greens as possible to 
>> take
>> responsibility for input and feedback.  We have tried to encourage and 
>> impress
>> on all that it is the responsibility of all Greens to take part in the
>> platform process.
>>
>>  Most useful information about the Green Platform and the process by 
>> which it
>> is developed is included in the convention delegate packet (provided with 
>> this
>> report).  Additionally, we would like to review a few more details for 
>> the
>> national Coordinating Committee.
>>
>> In September 2002, The GPUS CC approved, by an overwhelming majority, the
>> Platform development timeline and process (which is still posted on the
>> Platform Committee’s web page:  http://www.gp.org/platform).  In 
>> accordance
>> with this timeline and process, a call was put out soon afterwards for
>> interested Greens to review the 2000 Green Platform and begin sending in
>> suggested revisions, new materials and amendments.  The Platform 
>> Committee
>> adopted a template through which we requested material be sent:  this 
>> helped
>> the committee to know where material was intended to be placed and how it 
>> was
>> to be used; it also enabled those interested in submitting material to 
>> focus
>> on clarity and accuracy.
>>
>> The committee also experimented with several electronic communications
>> programs and tools.  One was a password-protected online submissions 
>> template.
>> Another was an online  phpbb bulletin board, intended for committee work.
>> There was also an open forum, which did gain many participants.  It was
>> removed a few months ago, at the recommendation of web manager Kevin 
>> Crisp,
>> due to concerns about infiltrators and troublemakers as we near a tense
>> election season.  Platform Committee members did not make much use of the
>> bulletin board, preferring instead to use the more familiar listserv. 
>> The
>> online submissions template proved confusing and was used two or three 
>> times.
>> While the online version wasn’t particularly helpful, most of those 
>> sending
>> submissions did use the requested template, and is clearly something that 
>> we
>> recommend using again in the future.
>>
>>
>> The Platform Committee had adopted a 2-cycle submissions process, 
>> stipulating
>> 2 submissions deadlines and a clear cut-off date past which no new 
>> material
>> could be accepted.   The announcement (reminder) on the COO listserv of 
>> the
>> first deadline at the end of April 2002, two days after it had passed, 
>> brought
>> forth a flurry of renewed interest (with several extensions granted for 
>> work
>> in progress).  From the material submitted up through this time, the 
>> Platform
>> Committee compiled a “comparison draft,” in which new material was placed
>> side-by-side with the original Platform text and posted on the nternet.
>>
>> The final deadline for new material was December 31, 2003.  Leading up to
>> this, the Platform Committee and interested Greens around the country 
>> helped
>> review the Platform and submissions and determine any “holes” – places 
>> where
>> new material was needed, or revisions or updates should be made.  In some
>> states, Greens volunteered to undertake drafting needed language, which 
>> we had
>> other states review and (mostly!) approve.   Submissions were also 
>> drafted by
>> a few groups of Greens who shared a particular interest:  the 4-state Ag
>> Conference; Secular Greens; the International Committee, and the Lavender 
>> and
>> Women’s Caucuses. Their work was circulated through one or more state 
>> parties
>> (per the approved process), and received the necessary approval to be 
>> sent to
>> the Platform Committee.
>>
>> After the final deadline, the submissions were posted on the internet, 
>> and the
>> Platform Committee has continued to receive feedback while compiling the 
>> 2004
>> Draft Platform.   All material submitted to the Platform Committee had to 
>> be
>> included in the draft, unless it was sent without the approval of a state 
>> or
>> accredited caucus; duplicated material already in the Platform; or, was
>> obviously antithetical to Green Platform policy (there was only one such
>> submission, involving the increased criminalization of marijuana, 
>> including
>> abolishing medicinal use altogether – that one got sent back).
>>
>> The 2004 Draft platform is now available on the internet at 
>> http://greens.org/
>> platforms/us
>>
>> The Platform committee is continuing to take feedback.  Some editing
>> continues:  correcting grammar and spelling, cleaning up some language;
>> inserting inadvertent omissions; and small revisions based on the latest
>> feedback.  While we cannot take any new material at this time, we believe 
>> that
>> we covered all necessary ground for 2004.  We are also planning to 
>> include
>> some cross references and an index.  You will notice that the 2004 
>> Platform is
>> a larger document:  we have added new planks and expanded material in 
>> several
>> areas, including Foreign Policy, Labor, Women, Lavender Issues, Health,
>> Energy, Agriculture, Ocean Protection, Youth, Green Economics, Verifiable
>> Voting Equipment, Technology, Privatization, Media, Criminal Justice,
>> Veterans’ Rights, Space and more.  Additionally, feedback indicates that 
>> major
>> policy is receiving overall support from Greens throughout the country.
>>
>>
>>  The 2004 platform process had to accommodate both those who wanted very
>> short, concise blocks of material and those who wanted a document 
>> bordering on
>> a series of research papers.  Because we received some good material 
>> which was
>> simply too much to include in this type of document, the Platform 
>> Committee
>> would like to post these submissions on our website for further reference 
>> by
>> those interested.
>>
>> We encourage further feedback.  If any outstanding issues remain that we
>> cannot resolve before the convention, we will send out a notice of any 
>> items
>> for which discussion is still needed.  Platform Hearings are scheduled 
>> for
>> Friday, June 25, 1:30-5:00 p.m. at the Hyatt Regency Hotel (check 
>> convention
>> schedule for exact location).  See the Platform FAQ, included in the 
>> delegate
>> packets which you are also receiving, for the process by which we will 
>> resolve
>> any final issues.  The FAQ also includes the final adoption process which 
>> will
>> take place at the national convention the morning of Saturday, June 26th.
>>
>>
>> Thanks to the GPUS-CC, SC, members of the Platform Committee and Greens
>> throughout the country for participating and helping the process work, 
>> and
>> helping to make the Green Platform still the best Platform in the U.S.!
>>
>> Holly Hart, Co-chair, GPUS Platform Committee
>> Tom Fusco, Co-chair, GPUS platform Committee
>> Budd Dickinson, Secretary, GPUS Platform Committee
>>
>>
>> Special Thanks Are Due To:
>> The states of California, Nevada, Oregon, Iowa, Washington, D.C., 
>> Wisconsin,
>> Minnesota, Rhode Island, Virginia, Maine, New Jersey, New York, Hawai’i,
>> Pennsylvania, Missouri, Kansas and Florida (doubtless some are being left 
>> out)
>> for reviewing and submitting new or updated material.
>>
>> Ohio (should win a prize for the nicest feedback report), Missouri, Iowa,
>> Virginia, Rhode Island (among others) for offering helping feedback.
>>
>> The 4-State Ag Conference – the first group to begin work on the 2004 
>> Platform
>> (comprising Greens from Missouri, Kansas, Iowa and Nebraska), and Dee 
>> Berry
>> who convened the group and facilitated work done there.
>>
>> The GPUS International Committee including Tony Affigne and Justine 
>> McCabe,
>> for work on U.S. economic policy toward Cuba and Middle East peace 
>> process.
>>
>> Charles Laws for material and editing, and fellow Nevada Greens, for 
>> review
>> and write needed material.
>>
>> Iowa Greens, for serving as late-in-the-game platform mill (and they 
>> actually
>> read the material carefully and offered some useful comments!).
>>
>> The GP of Texas website and anonymous writer who plagiarized important 
>> needed
>> material.
>>
>>
>> Mike Ewall for research and work on energy and various areas, for help 
>> with
>> editing, and advice on tech support.
>>
>> Milo Vanucci, Claire Mortimer, and Cameron Spitzer for material on 
>> various
>> areas; and Milo for cross references and index.
>>
>> Brian Czeck for help on economics; more Green economists for material and
>> advice (and a workshop coming up at the convention).
>>
>> Budd Dickinson, for work on a number of areas and major work on editing.
>>
>> Jenefer Ellingston, in conjunction with the DC Statehood Greens and
>> International Committee for work on foreign policy, labor and other 
>> areas, and
>> help with editing.
>>
>> Marc Reichardt, who took on the task of editing the “comp-draft” for 
>> needed
>> corrections and style.
>>
>> Tom Fusco, for calling and pestering people to look at the thing.
>>
>> Jeff Strang, Jason Jones, Mark Dunlea, Harold Phoenix, George DiCarlo and 
>> Cara
>> Campbell for editing help.
>>
>> Morgen D’Arc who provide material for a Women’s plank; and the GPUS 
>> National
>> Women’s Caucus, which oversaw strengthened language in support of the 
>> ERA.
>>
>> GPUS Lavender Caucus, which provided important new material on civil 
>> rights
>> and health care issues.
>>
>> Secular Greens, who took the trouble to get feedback from several states 
>> and
>> revise their material based on that feedback – exactly how we hoped the
>> process would work!
>>
>> Kevin Crisp, for technical advice, web-hosting and initially setting up 
>> and
>> maintaining the phpbb bulletin board.
>>
>> Cameron Spitzer for providing the Platform Committee listserv and 
>> webspace for
>> posting the 2004 platform submissions and Draft platform.
>>
>> Susan Dridi for crucial important and timely help which enabled us to get 
>> the
>> material on the website….
>>
>> GPUS Secretary Greg Gerritt, for overall advice, and support.
>>
>> Steven Schmidt, former Platform Committee co-chair and major force behind 
>> the
>> 1996 and 2000 Platforms, who provided guidance and advice.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Platform-work mailing list
>> Platform-work at lists.gp-us.org
>> http://lists.gp-us.org/mailman/listinfo/platform-work
>
>