Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: 876 leaders? RepubliCrats worst nightmare? I'm good with that.

Posted 7 years ago on Dec. 11, 2011, 3:09 a.m. EST by AFarewellToKings (1486)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

21 Comments

21 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by Fastman99 (18) from Houston, TX 7 years ago

I feel like we should all be allowed to vote on declarations that come out of the committee.

[-] 1 points by AFarewellToKings (1486) 7 years ago

While attending the NATIONAL GENERAL ASSEMBLY in July 2012 the Delegates shall deliberate and vote upon grievances, proposals and solutions to be included in the PETITION FOR A REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES and, if necessary, adjourn for further consultation with the American People as our founding fathers did during the first two Continental Congresses. "

I'm not sure what would make it necessary to adjourn except perhaps that after the ratification vote, not all delegates sign the document.

Their are many proposals on forms of democratic participation that will be on the table I expect.

Remember that initially the mandate is only to produce the List Of Grievances. Forming an independent third party would require a new mandate I would think.

[-] 1 points by hanleyj2 (7) 7 years ago

yay, more representation, like it's supposed to be.

[-] 1 points by AFarewellToKings (1486) 7 years ago

an end to the two party monopoly. Go ahead run for delegate!

NGA NGA NGA NAG NAG NAG (that's me lol) thx

[-] 1 points by Demian (497) from San Francisco, CA 7 years ago

I really hope something comes of this.

[-] 1 points by AFarewellToKings (1486) 7 years ago

Print it out and show it to people, It'll come as sure as the Declaration Of Independence finally came. Consider this our 'Suffolk Resolves'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffolk_Resolves

[-] 1 points by MASTERdBATER (15) 7 years ago
  1. Elect one man and one woman from each of the 435 congressional districts in March 2012 plus six delegates from Washington, D.C., Puerto Rico and the U.S. Territories. Voting will be online, possibly telephone and at local polling places.

What will be done to ensure there is no fraud in the voting?

[-] 2 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 7 years ago

So if there are two women more qualified, than you must put a less qualified man in there?

[-] 1 points by AFarewellToKings (1486) 7 years ago

Yes, and visa-versa. How would women feel if the assembly was all male or visa versa? I understand your question and in purist terms would agree but there seems little doubt the assembly will be very well qualified and balanced.

[-] 1 points by AFarewellToKings (1486) 7 years ago

Assume for a moment that this fraud was impossible. If there was no possibility of fraud, what is your opinion of the Declaration / Resolves? If you were forced to say, how say you?

[-] 0 points by MASTERdBATER (15) 7 years ago

I might not be as smart as you, so I have no idea what you just said. I will clarify my point from before as a concern based off our current system that has regulations in place, but fraud is still ramped. With methods like online and phone voting I think it would be difficult to consider the result of the votes as an accurate portrait of popular opinion.

[-] 1 points by AFarewellToKings (1486) 7 years ago

This isn't based on the current system and "it's " regulations. OWS99% has their own. Elections of delegates:

"Election Committees in the 435 voting districts, consisting of volunteers, shall organize, coordinate and transparently fund this election. The voting process shall be free from the corrupting influence of corporate money... "

This isn't a popularity contest per say. That only becomes an issue in general elections. Whether every person in the congressional district votes or only a small percentage, it is simply a process to get two delegates to the NGA.

[-] 1 points by Demian (497) from San Francisco, CA 7 years ago

Sounds promising! Is this for real?

[-] 1 points by Demian (497) from San Francisco, CA 7 years ago

Right on.

[-] 1 points by AFarewellToKings (1486) 7 years ago

I'll take that as a YAY. I'll post the tally on December 17th.

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 7 years ago

It's pretty interesting. There is one element I don't like and that is the fact that your delegates will pooled from those of independent means.

[-] 1 points by AFarewellToKings (1486) 7 years ago

That's a good question. Your concern, correct me if I'm wrong, is that the potential delegates with more financial resources could win potentially creating an elitist Assembly? That's something I would like to hear more discussion about too. Maybe you could bring it up with the working group seeing as how it is now back on this website (re-occupying, if you like) If I get some feedback I'll pass it along. thx

http://www.nycga.net/groups/the-99-declaration-working-group/

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 7 years ago

Yea, of course. That's my concern.

[-] 1 points by AFarewellToKings (1486) 7 years ago

So how would it be different from current practices, and what does free from corrupting influence of corporate money mean. Bearing in mind of course that these aren't people running for congress, but may in the future. Very interesting, thx

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 7 years ago

Yes, and now you understand, in part, why a politician is a politician. Most of us are not of independent means.