Overview; Green Party (US) National Meeting, 2007

This year’s meeting opened with the unanimous approval for the ascension of the Mountain Party of West Virginia into the GPUS. Following this vote was a wrangling over procedure mostly initiated by the delegates from the state of California that would characterize the proceedings of this years meeting. With the plenary agenda behind schedule due to various objections to the agenda the delegates then heard from various speakers representing several international green parties including Brazil and Austria.
Committee, Caucus and state reports were presented throughout the three days of the proceedings though they were impeded by time restrictions directly scheduled into the agenda. This handicap prevented the in depth dissemination of all pertinent information but, more gravely, precluded the direct participation of the delegates in understanding and utilizing information presented. As a result of this trend throughout the meeting delegates expressed their grievances with the inadequacy of the agenda and prompting many to discuss the need for an extended meeting with a far more liberal schedule.
Bids for the 2008 GPUS Convention were presented by state and local affiliates from four cities. These cities include Oakland CA, Chicago IL, Detroit MI and Minneapolis MN. Based on the quality of the presentations and the amount of planning already conducted (based again on the presentations) I suggest that the Montana Green Party consider endorsing the bids for Minneapolis or Oakland. Web pages for both bids can be reached by visiting the state sites for both respective locations.
One agenda item that many delegates looked forward to attending was the planning sessions in the areas of Finance, Fundraising and Strategic Planning. However upon attending these three sessions it turned out that they were more like committee presentations and less like an interactive forum where delegates could offer and explore alternative and new techniques for attacking the three items mentioned above. In particular the strategic planning session was so controlled that delegates were not permitted to discuss any options other than presenting a “fear” and a “hope” for the upcoming year in regard to the party. The fund raising session was not a venue for exploring new fund raising strategies but rather an opportunity for the merchandise committee to detail some of the products available on the online store. Finally the finance committee disseminated several documents highlighting current and “projected” fiscal results. (Copies of these documents can be provided upon request) These documents were criticized by many delegates upon finding that the financial committee has been unable to produce an agreeable budget meaning that the party is currently operating without a budget.
Another item of interest is that an election was held for filling the positions Secretary and Co-chair(x4) within the national apparatus. This process was rather cumbersome and convoluted. Ultimately the existing secretary was retained and four new co-chairs were elected to fill vacated seats. (Results available online) Some exciting and promising candidates were elected to these open co-chair positions and it is my hope that they will be able to infuse needed lifeblood into the national party.
Finally I want to provide brief discussion on the announced presidential candidates. Initially ten candidates were present for the candidate forum held on July 14th. Ultimately one candidate was actually endorsing Ralph Nader, another was only running for vice president and two other are pursuing both the Green and Libertarian nominations. Each candidate was allotted four minutes to give an introductory speech. I recorded these speeches and hope to have them available for download (mp3) within the next month. Delegates also heard from two major speakers though neither announced a plan to pursue the green ticket. Ralph Nader spoke about the challenges of Pennsylvania Election/Candidate laws and Cynthia McKinney(D) spoke about her work as a Representative from the state of Georgia as well as various media attacks upon her for remarks made about the 9/11 truth movement or her opposition to the tendency to bow to the Bush regime.
Since there is no Green Primary in the state of Montana the party must actively nominate a candidate through procedures dictated by the national party. The state party secretary will be put in touch with the correct national committee to accomplish this.
In closing it is my opinion that the GPUS is currently in a state of reorganization and reconstruction. No coherent strategy has been devised in the years since 2004 and it shows. At present the party has no paid strategists, media organizers, campaign workers or legal representatives. Party finances make the party only marginally profitable meaning there is no general reserve of funds to mount effective campaigns on a national level. GP leadership seem to be full of dedication to the cause but lacking in charisma. Furthermore fringe elements continue to represent minority positions within the national framework (ex; extremist environmentalists). Not to mention that the median age of those actively involved reveals that no efforts have been executed to continue to draw young people into the party further isolating the party from the youngest voting generation. A comprehensive strategy needs to be produced at both state and national levels to reverse these trends and to build a strong and effective national party. Unfortunately there is not much the state party can do at present to alleviate this situation since major efforts are needed to build the state party before any national focus can be considered.
One final point to be considered is that if we as a state party fail to mobilize to gain ballot access for 2008 then none of these things will matter because we won’t be participating in the next election anyways. It is each of our responsibility to brings others into the fold and bring funding to the state party. Please post any questions as comments here with this post.