Phylis Kahn writes: >In addition to the named plaintiffs, the case for >earlier elections is supported by the following noted >persons well known for their expertise in public >affairs: >Former State Senator (and President of the Senate) >Allan Spear >State Senator Larry Pogemiller >State Representative Ron Abrams >Joan Growe, Former Secretary of State >Arvonne Fraser, Hubert Humphrey School faculty member >Lee Eklund, former Chair of the Minneapolis >Republican Party >Carlton Crawford, Current Chair Minneapolis >Republican Party >John Brandl, Former legislator and Dean of the >Humphrey School >Lyle Schwarzkopf, Former Minneapolis City >Clerk,Former Legislator and Alderman >John Bergford, Former Minneapolis Alderman
>November note: The decision was made to leave the >case in Federal court >along with the other case contesting the district >lines. Plaintiffs and >defendants have agreed that cross motions for summary >judgment will be >filed no later than February 2, 2004. In addition, >on November 5, the >Minneapolis Charter Commission passed language >requiring an early election >on to the city council for consideration as an >ordinance. (Passage would require a 13-0 vote from >the council.) TN I want to thank Rep. Kahn for posting a reply, but this only seems to prove that both major parties work together when the two party system is threatened. I see that a lot of very important and prominent Democrats and Republicans support this effort. I suppose I don't have the officially recognized "expertise in public affairs" that they do, but I don't see the names of any independents. (I do note that a lot of Dems and Repubs also oppose this effort becuase f the can of worms it opens.) Could it be that this is an effort supported by partisans in both parties who hate the idea of a well organized third party like the Greens (or Gov. Ventura) getting even a little piece of the pie?? I think so. Tom DeLay also used legal facts to justify his actions in Texas and taken alone I'm sure this could be justified to someone, (as this case is also in federal court we'll see how both hold up) but the flavor of the debate changes substantially when you add the legislator's motivation as a discussion peice. Again, why only now is this suddenly important, not in 1993, 1983, or any other of those previous times that the city has redistricted the wards? Weren't these same prominant and noted individuals around then? Wasn't the need for accurrate representation as urgent in those days? Weren't the legal facts basically the same? The only difference..no Green Party, no Independence Party , no independents on the city council. What I've read so far only proves this as an effort to insure that those running the important elements of our city goverment remains an exclusive two-party club. Tamir Nolley 3-2 __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
