To respond to David Weinlick's concerns: >If DFLers in St. Paul have > caucuses every year as an opportunity to meet and discuss politics, > that sounds great. One problem with the Minneapolis system right now > is that we have caucuses that are completely tied to what city-wide > races are up for election in November, which means that they cycle in > and out. We do not necessarily have them every odd year.
David: We simplified the system by getting rid of school board elections in odd years when no other city office was up - so, for example there were no city elections in 2003 and will be none in 2007. But is it really so confusing to say we elect delegates every election year? > I understand this argument when it comes to people moving into the > city, but otherwise, how does this limit the numbers of delegates? Because people get activated by city candidates, city issues - a whole raft of things that can happen in the 12 months between Caucus Day 2004 and Caucus Day 2005. (Think smoking bans, or the police chief's conduct, or school closings - major issues no one was thinking about at this year's caucuses.) Right now, if you want to participate in the city year, you have to step up 20 months before the election! Good for the reliable hardcores, bad for those who become interested as the city debate takes center stage. Blocking election-year enthusiasm is a good way to weaken a party. > Especially with the great turnout this year, I suspect that we would > actually have MORE delegates for next year's convention if we relied on > this year's caucus attendance. Why? Anyone who is currently a delegate can participate next year - and so can anyone else who becomes inspired by city issues and/or candidates in the next 12 months. City-year caucuses BUILD on a strong presidential year. > Actually, the city-only caucuses are a result of a recent > constitutional amendment. Next year would be the first time the > amendment required city-only caucuses. The proposed amendment in > effect repeals a previous amendment, rather than instituting something > new. Sometimes in these discussions we forget the context of the > debate. True, but context backatcha: we staged the 2004 caucuses predicated on having expanded 2005 delegate eligibility. We're changing the rules in the middle of an election cycle - I know many people who chose not to be delegates this year because they would have a chance next year. Changing the rules in mid-cycle is not fair. >Many people who attended this year assumed that > their delegate status would be good through next year's convention--I > spent quite a bit of time explaining that to people on caucus night. But if they were going to show up next year anyway, no loss. The city-year caucus lets them participate - and lets new people in. > People who have moved within Minneapolis are still delegates or > alternates to the convention. So, for those people, it does not > actually limit their participation. This concern certainly applies to > anyone who moves into the city. However, if people choose not to show, > that is a concern no matter when we have caucuses. Again, I see the > primary issue is to keep people interested in involvement. One way to keep them interested is let people join the DFL endorsement process over the next several months - not "freeze" the list when many city candidates haven't even announced. > If we have city-only caucuses some odd years, but not others, I think > we are apt to continue this kind of confusion. That is why I support > something regular that everyone can anticipate--either have caucuses > every single year, or every other year. It's not complicated: DFLers elect delegates every election year. Is it simpler to say we elect delegates in two election years but not in the third? David Brauer Kingfield 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
