I have a problem with this interpretation of the DFL Constitution with regard to multiple party endorsements. If the DFL was to accept this interpretation it would mean that a candidate seeking endorsement does not need to be a member of the party awarding the endorsement. I can't speak for the Green Party but as a DFL'er I expect our endorsement to only be given to candidates who are members of our party. Since the DFL Constitution prohibts membership in any other political party (major or minor) our endorsed candidates can not be members of any other party without violating the DFL constitution. That's my opinion on the intent of that provision in the DFL constitution is. Now maybe my view is the minority view in the DFL and they may be sound reasoning for why we may want to have a different standard for candidates than for members. I think it is a subject for further discussion within the DFL in light of the confusion that results from the current language in the DFL constitution. The situation where a candidate could be nominated but not allowed to adress the convention is absurd in my opinion! Dennis Hill St. Paul DFL'er SD 65
|
- [Mpls] FW: DFL/Mpls.: Cross-endorsement Melendez, Brian
- RE: [Mpls] FW: DFL/Mpls.: Cross-endorsement David Brauer
- RE: [Mpls] FW: DFL/Mpls.: Cross-endorsement Annie Young
- Re: [Mpls] FW: DFL/Mpls.: Cross-endorsement Denny Hill
- RE: [Mpls] FW: DFL/Mpls.: Cross-endorsement Burl Gilyard
- Denny Hill
