>I have personally long been in support of reducing >the number of delegates per precinct to encourage >actual decision making at the local precinct level.
If that was the case, I don't think I would have been "allowed" to become a delegate to the Senate District Convention, especially after presenting my minority resolution about the public funding of abortions. One participant questioned why I was there in the first place - and the Secretary, in no uncertain terms - let it be known that she was out of line. Then <I> let her have it. I'm a trade-unionist, I explained, and I don't think the Republicans would welcome me. The resolution was voted down, of course. But I was able to present it and have it discussed. The Enlightened Ones voted it down, but I did get 4 Yeas.
It would depend on when the selection process delegates occurred. I definitely have a minority view on public funding of abortions, the death penalty, and American worker displacement by H1B immigrants. If my "qualifications" were voted on, I'd be voted down, and only the left wing of the DFL would be represented.
>We are in a rebuilding phase, and have by virtue of a very large
>turnout infused our party with a lot of new and returned voices that I am
>confident will help us steer a more positive and centrist party, still
>committed as always to social justice and a future of hope for all
>Americans. Our party has the same machinery it did the day before
>yesterday, but it is a new party that I would like to trust for a full two
>years before we renew it again in 2006.
And that's a good thing. I haven't been this involved in Democratic politics, ever. I'm glad I became a District Delegate. While there was no evidence of compromise from the left at my precinct caucus, I hope there <will> be compromise at the District level, or higher in the City and State Conventions.
For the record, my Resolution was as follows:
Whereas, the Minnesota Bill of Rights in Article I, Section 16 of the State Constitution enumerates: that no control or interference with the rights of conscience shall be permitted; and
Whereas, the Supreme Court of this State failed to recognize this provision in their decision of Doe v. Gomez in 1995, providing that public funds shall be used to pay for abortions in the State of Minnesota; and
Whereas, a subject class of citizens is now forcibly compelled by the State, against their religious and moral beliefs, to pay for abortions by the use of their taxes, in direct violation of their enumerated rights.
BE IT RESOLVED THAT:
Plank 51 of the DFL Platform be amended to read:
"[We support] [p]rivate and public funding for health care programs that include pregnancy care and family planning, except that no person shall be forced to pay for abortion, contrary to their religious or moral beliefs, or otherwise violating their rights of conscience".
After the vote I commented that I hope there weren't any members of Amnesty International present. :-(
Neal Krasnoff Ward 7, Precinct 5 Loring Park
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
