Monday, February 21, 2005

GuvWurld Week In Review

When I get working on logistics, I tend to write less in this space. In the past week I've been focused on gathering info on Instant Runoff Voting, including the San Francisco Department of Elections report (.pdf) on the city's first experience with ranked choice voting. I've also been looking at possible formats and potential facilitators for Eureka's upcoming town hall forum on IRV. By way of an update, there won't be much to say until Scott Menzies and I meet with Eureka Councilmembers Chris Kerrigan on Mike Jones on March 1.

In Arcata, the last City Council meeting had an impressive community outpouring of commentary on the conscientious objector resolution. Wisely, it was only brought forward for discussion, not a vote. The result of the discussion is yet another town hall forum. The No Confidence Resolution was not addressed and I still do not know when that will come out of subcommittee (Dave Meserve and Harmony Groves).

Also worthy of note this week:

Top of Page / GuvWurld Blog Home Page

Tuesday, February 15, 2005

IRV Forum ON in Eureka, Arcata Considers Protecting Conscientious Objectors

I just came from a meeting with Eureka, CA City Councilmembers Chris Kerrigan and Mike Jones. Realizing Community essayist Scott Menzies was also present. Efforts are now officially underway to hold a town hall forum on election reform, and Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) in particular, in Eureka.

Over the next two weeks, Chris and Mike will arrange one or more potentially viable locations, most likely in a church outside of either of their wards. Scott and I will be contacting potential speakers for the event and also developing a marketing plan to get the word out and begin the process of offering more education on what is IRV. The four of us will gather again on March 1 to make a final decision on the location and date for the forum.

Today's announcement is especially gratifying considering the appeals made to the Eureka City Council beginning last October amid the anticipated controversy of the then-impending election. At that time, all we asked was that Council engage us in dialog, hear our concerns, and allow the growing election reform movement to be advanced through them as an official channel. Today there is undeniable momentum for election reform efforts in Humboldt County, CA.

On a related note, the No Confidence Resolution is soon to be addressed by the Arcata, CA City Council though their published agenda does not include this topic for tomorrow night's meeting. Arcata Vice Mayor Dave Meserve advised me to expect this delay as he wants to address another national matter first. The following resolution calling for protection of conscientious objectors in Arcata will instead be getting a hearing tomorrow night. Apparently only a discussion is expected with a vote held over until at least the next Council session.

WHEREAS, according to the Pentagon, as of December 2004, more than 5500 American military personnel, and one third of the Individual Ready Reserves who have been called up have refused orders to participate in the war against Iraq.

WHEREAS, the attack on Iraq violates the UN Charter (Art. 2, Sec. 3,4), which prohibits the “unilateral use of force”; and the Nuremberg Principles (VI (a)), which prohibit “crimes against peace,” including “initiating and waging a war of aggression,” which is considered the “supreme international crime.”

WHEREAS, The U.N. Charter, a treaty ratified by the U.S. Senate in 1945, and the Nuremberg Principles, enunciated in a binding Executive Agreement in 1945 and incorporated in the U.S. Law of Land Warfare in 1956, are part of and incorporated into the Supreme Law of the Land under the U.S. Constitution (Art.VI, Sec. 2).

WHEREAS, Congress never declared war on Iraq, and therefore the war is in violation of the US Constitution (Art I, Sec. 8); nor did the attack fulfill the requirements of the War Powers Act of 1973, since there was no “imminent” threat.

WHEREAS, because of the violations listed above, the attack on Iraq constitutes an illegal war and a “Crime Against Peace” under Constitutional and International law.

WHEREAS, an order to participate in an illegal war is an “unlawful order.”

WHEREAS, under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (Art. 92) and the Army Field Manual (Sec. 509), military personnel have the duty to obey only “lawful orders” and an obligation to disobey “unlawful orders.”

WHEREAS, Under the Nuremberg Principles, complicity in the commission of “Crimes Against Peace” is a crime for an individual, “provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.”

WHEREAS, any military personnel who refuse to obey orders to participate in an illegal war are obeying, and therefore in compliance with, the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the US Constitution, and International Law.

WHEREAS, residents of Arcata are currently participating in the illegal war in Iraq, or have been told that they may soon be deployed; and many young residents, faced with limited opportunities at home, sign up with the armed forces, active and reserve, and may be ordered to fight in Iraq or in other illegal wars.

WHEREAS, military personnel from Arcata, who choose to disobey orders when called upon to participate in the illegal war against Iraq, or any illegal war, should have protection from prosecution, because they are in compliance with United States Law, including the Constitution.

THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT The City Council of the City of Arcata supports all troops, and demands that they be brought home now, as previously resolved by this Council (Resolution 045-10) on July 21, 2004.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT The City Council of the City of Arcata also supports those military personnel who refuse to participate in the Iraq war, or any other illegal war.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT The City Council of the City of Arcata demands that those who refuse to participate in illegal wars not be prosecuted for desertion or related crimes.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT The City Council of the City of Arcata will consider what further actions it should take in order to protect from prosecution residents of Arcata who are military personnel, if they choose to disobey orders to participate in any illegal war.

The United Nations Charter, Article 2:
(3) All Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.
(4) All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.

The Nuremberg Principles,
Principle IV. The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.
Principle VI: The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:
(a) Crimes against peace:
(i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;
Principle VII. Complicity in the commission of a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity as set forth in Principle VI is a crime under international law.

US Constitution,
Article VI: This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land
Article I, section 8: The Congress shall have Power+ to Declare War

War Powers Act of 1973, SEC. 2. (c) :
The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.

Uniform Code of Military Justice:
Section 890,Art.90, Para. 2:: Any person subject to this chapter who willfully disobeys a lawful command of his superior commissioned officer; shall be punished, if the offense is committed in time of war, by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct
Art. 92, Para. 1(c): A general order or regulation is lawful unless it is contrary to the Constitution, the laws of the United States, or lawful superior orders+
Art. 90, Para. 14c (2):Disobeying superior commissioned officer.
(a) Lawfulness of the order.
(i) Inference of lawfulness. An order requiring the performance of a military duty or act may be inferred to be lawful and it is disobeyed at the peril of the subordinate. This inference does not apply to a patently illegal order, such as one that directs the commission of a crime.

The United States Army Field Manual - The Law of Land Warfare, 1956:
498 Crimes Under International Law - Any person, whether a member of the armed forces or a civilian. who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible thereof and liable to punishment....
509 Defense of Superior Orders
b In considering the question of whether a superior order constitutes a valid defense, the court shall take into consideration the fact that obedience to lawful military orders is the duty of every member of the armed forces+At the same time it must be borne in mind that members of the armed forces are bound to obey only lawful orders.
510 Government Officials The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a war crime acted as the head of a State or as a responsible government official does not relieve him from responsibility for his act.

Top of Page / GuvWurld Blog Home Page

Logan Dake Mistaken on Evidence, Still Contends Tyson Misled Times-Standard

GuvWurld has been closely following the story of Logan Dake, formerly a maintenance worker for the City of Eureka who is now challenging the City on two legal fronts. On Logan's behalf, the Labor Commission is pursuing a wrongful termination case while the CA Department of Fair Employment and Housing is exploring discrimination charges.

This past Sunday, the Eureka Times-Standard became the first mainstream media outlet to cover the story. As GuvWurld noted at the time, Logan mostly looked favorably upon this, with one exception. According to the Times-Standard, Eureka City Manager David Tyson "said he has not seen a complaint from" the CA Department of Fair Employment and Housing. Logan promised to provide GuvWurld with documentation proving otherwise.

As it turns out, Logan's copy of the discrimination case was stamped "received" in the San Francisco office of the Department of Fair Employment and Housing, rather than in Mr. Tyson's office as Logan originally asserted. However, Logan notes, additional documents from SF demonstrate that the two offices have corresponded back and forth and so this should call into question Mr. Tyson's forthrightness about having seen the complaint.

Minor sniveling aside, the view from the community must surely be in favor of restoring Logan's job with back pay. The alternative, becoming more clear, would be expensive legal challenges and appeals which, if played all the way out, would be contained by no limit to the settlement Logan could receive. At this stage, were the City to settle with Logan, there is a cap of $150,000 that Logan could be awarded. He claims he is not seeking such a payoff but rather to spare the City the time and expense, if they would just put him back to work.

Top of Page / GuvWurld Blog Home Page

Sunday, February 13, 2005

Logan Dake Discrimination Story Finally Covered By Eureka Times-Standard

GuvWurld broke the story of Logan Dake in an exclusive interview back in December. He is still out of work and pursuing legal challenges against the City of Eureka for discrimination and wrongful termination. Today, the Eureka-Times Standard elevated the profile of the story.

Earlier this evening I spoke with Logan. He was generally pleased with the coverage, figuring it will help increase his leverage in getting the City "to do the right thing." Logan did make one troubling observation about this section of the article:
Dake said he has also filed a complaint with the state Department of Fair Employment and Housing. A representative there said the agency could not comment on individual cases. Tyson said he has not seen a complaint from that department.
According to Logan, Tyson must have seen it. Logan claims to have a copy of the complaint stamped "received" by Tyson's office. Logan has promised to provide this document for GuvWurld publication within the next 48 hours.

Top of Page / GuvWurld Blog Home Page

No Confidence Resolution Endorsed By Green Party of Humboldt County, CA

The No Confidence Resolution was endorsed yesterday by the Green Party of Humboldt County, CA. The Greens' quarterly General Assembly convened in Garberville, CA for a day of mostly internal housekeeping matters - by-law amendments, endorsements, and committee membership elections. However, we also spent well over 30 minutes discussing No Confidence, ultimately leading to a few minor edits and the adoption of what is now Version 5.2 of the No Confidence Resolution.

While the Green Party platform has favored abolishing corporate personhood, one of yesterday's sticking points was the resolution's references to corporations. To achieve consensus for the endorsement, the word "corporate" was removed from the first WHEREAS clause, maintaining the spirit of opposing all private ownership of voting processes.

Still further discussion focused on whether it was appropriate to include any language that even vaguely supported continued use of voting machines. As a result, the first RESOLVE clause was changed to read: "all election processes are owned and operated in the public domain";

This concern was also addressed by a slight modification of the third WHEREAS clause, striking the phrase "mechanism for" (leaving it to read: "any future voting"), and replacing "audit trail" with "paper ballot";

The final minor edit led to insertion of the word "locally" in the fifth RESOLVE clause, expanding the accountability of requiring vote counting to be done publicly in front of citizen and media witnesses.

Readers interested in comparing versions of the resolution can trace the entire history of its evolution in this section of the GuvWurld News Archive.

Next steps with the Greens include: outreach to the party on the state level, lobbying the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors, and sending party members back to their other community groups to win additional support for lobbying at the City Council level wherever possible (some places, such as Garberville, are unincorporated and have no Council). It may also be a plus that the Arcata City Council, which has already agreed to consider the resolution, has three Green members (a majority of the seats).

Top of Page / GuvWurld Blog Home Page

Saturday, February 12, 2005

Update on Arcata City Council

Today's Eureka Times-Standard has an article about the Arcata City Council and the resolution it is about to consider to create protections in Arcata for those refusing military service:
The proposed resolution says, in part: "The City Council of the city of Arcata supports all troops, and demands that they be brought home now, as previously resolved by this Council (Resolution 045-10) on July 21, 2004.

"Be it further resolved that the City Council of the city of Arcata also supports those military personnel who refuse to participate in the Iraq war, or any other illegal war."

The resolution states that the City Council would demand "that those who refuse to participate in illegal wars not be prosecuted for desertion or related crimes."

It adds that the City Council "will consider what further actions it should take in order to protect from prosecution residents of Arcata who are military personnel, if they choose to disobey orders to participate in any illegal war."
The Times-Standard editorializes about this here. As I wrote in the last entry, the Arcata City Council agendas are posted here, however as of this writing the 2/16 agenda has not yet been posted. This is relevant in that the work on the objector resolution may be preempting the consideration of the No Confidence Resolution and we just won't know for sure until the agenda is posted.

Gotta cut this short - off to present No Confidence at the Humboldt County Green Party General Assembly. Who knew they'd allot 20 minutes for me on the agenda?

Top of Page / GuvWurld Blog Home Page

Wednesday, February 09, 2005

CONFIRMED: Eureka Councilmembers Kerrigan & Jones to Discuss Town Hall Forum on IRV

Next Tuesday at 1pm I will be meeting with Eureka City Councilmembers Chris Kerrigan and Mike Jones to discuss convening a town hall forum on bringing Instant Runoff Voting to Eureka, CA. This is the second big week in a row following the Arcata City Council's decision last week to formally consider the No Confidence Resolution.

I don't want to exaggerate the importance of the Kerrigan/Jones meeting. I will reserve excitement for once the forum date and location have been confirmed. Still, though, this is happening because Scott Menzies and Jack Nounnan and a few others have been joining me since October for regular appearances at the Eureka City Council meetings. This absolutely is one of many small victories to be acknowledged if not celebrated along the way to election reform.

I have not had any new contact with Arcata City Councilmember Harmony Groves or Arcata Vice Mayor Dave Meserve. The pair comprise a Council subcommittee responsible for editing the No Confidence Resolution. I have been assured an opportunity to engage them on their revision work but I do not know when that will happen.

I believe the next Council meeting agenda will be posted on Friday of this week in advance of next Wednesday's session. If I don't connect with Harmony or Dave by the end of the week, this public notice will at least provide a hint at their time frame, and whether the resolution is ready for consideration or if it will have to wait until March. Meanwhile, Councilmembers in both Eureka and Arcata need to hear encouragement from constituents. I posted contact info for all of them at the bottom of this recent entry. Thank them for being LEADERS, and leading where you want to follow.

Finally, two upcoming events at which I'll be speaking about the No Confidence Resolution.
I will gladly accept invitations from area community groups willing to have a serious discussion on election reform. I'll be looking to do more media outreach too. Please contact me if you want to carpool from Eureka to Garberville on 2/12 or if you can help arrange other speaking opportunities.

Top of Page / GuvWurld Blog Home Page

Monday, February 07, 2005

Government Without Consent

Mike Whitney has written a ruthlessly honest piece for The Progressive Trail called "Government Without Consent." Excerpts:

Beyond the growing evidence of vote manipulation, the administration’s conduct is morally deplorable. Its unambiguous complicity in violations of human rights (torture), its attack on fundamental liberties (The Patriot Act, imprisonment of American citizens without due process) and its illegal waging of aggressive war have eroded its alleged mandate and called into question its right to govern.

The question for the citizen is simply this; when is it no longer acceptable to “do nothing”?


The political avenues for change have dimmed considerably. The Democratic Party poses no alternative to the war mongering and domestic repression initiated by the Bush administration. Moreover, the election of John Kerry (in my opinion) would have stymied genuine change by co-opting activists and transforming their anti-war efforts into a “rubber-stamp” for the occupation. Movements don’t need to compromise; they are free to maintain a pristine anti-war and anti-repression (Patriot Act) platform that reflects the values of its membership. The opportunity for meaningful change is no longer possible within confines of the two-party system. The restoration of basic rights and the end of this bloody, colonial war will only occur through social upheaval. Fortunately, American’s can refer to the founding document, The Declaration of Independence, for inspiration. It is the nation’s roadmap for revolution.


The state cannot be beaten through violence, but only through a carefully considered plan to elicit the sympathies of the American public. It is the shifting of consciousness (hearts and minds) that will precipitate regime change in America, not violence. When that shifting begins, infrastructure begins to shut down and the determination to continue the repression erodes.

To achieve that end, the public must be engaged in activities that cast light on the real nature of the regime. The administration’s devotion to force must be exposed to the broadest possible audience. That requires clever minds and a well-disciplined alternative press. In many respects, these are already in place and simply awaiting a trigger mechanism.
GuvWurld first referred to the No Confidence Resolution as a trigger mechanism in the Arcata Eye last May. Whitney also seems kindred in describing the Declaration of Independence as a "roadmap for revolution." Overall I get the impression that he and I imagine the same model needed for people and events to affect meaningful change. It is an excellent and exciting thing that he sees the pieces in place, awaiting the activation sequence, so to speak.

Top of Page / GuvWurld Blog Home Page

Sunday, February 06, 2005

Who Says Corporations Can Count Votes?

I just read a great letter posted on Democratic Underground by Paul R. Lehto, an attorney in Washington state who suing Sequoia over the company's vote counting secretiveness.
"To imagine secret ballots is to imagine FREEDOM of the vote. To imagine secret COUNTING of the votes by a multinational whose parent company de La Rue was awarded a lucrative US contract to print Iraqi dinars, is to imagine actual or potential TYRANNY. To trust a political friend to count the vote in secrecy without verification is to be an actual or potential TYRANT, who claims to owe the people no duty. To imagine all of us adults together (WE THE PEOPLE), smart and dumb, old and young, of all races, creeds, orientations and beliefs all having the same vote as the President of the United States is to imagine an image of EQUALITY that many have paid a great price for. To imagine that vote not necessarily counting based on the whims of the secret counting corporation is to see the end of FREE elections. To see the end of free elections, especially during a "permanent war" on "terror", is to see the end of freedom itself.

Our greatest leaders have said there comes a time in each generation for the true meaning of freedom to be discovered and enhanced.

We can know that freedom not only by ejecting these secretive corporations from our vote counting, but also by rediscovering the radical equality inherent in our equal votes. Smart people don't get two votes, and "dumb" people who "don't follow instructions" in Palm Beach County don't get their votes taken away. Why? Because there is such a thing as WE THE PEOPLE. Endowed by their creator with certain INALIENABLE rights, meaning rights that we are born with that can not be taken away, and we were born with them BEFORE our government was ever formed.

All power ultimately comes from the consent of WE THE PEOPLE, but we forget that sometimes, getting down on our knees and begging the government for this and that. Sometimes that's necessary because the people have delegated certain powers, but on occasoin [sic] government asserts a power it was simply never granted by the people.

For example, when it comes to something as fundamental as democracy, the government lacks the power, through contract, to cede that power of vote counting in a democracy to a multinational corporation or to any individual to operate in secret, because vote counting is a public democratic right. It is a public right for which the government has literally never been given the power to give away. The government, plainly and simply, combined with all of the world's corporations, UTTERLY LACK THE POWER to privatize our votes. We ougt [sic] not legitimize that privatization in any way by assuming it has any validity, because it is void ab initio (from the beginning).

Most importantly, (to put it plainly but crudely) WE DON'T NEED TO PROVE SHIT, THE VOTING MACHINE COMPANIES MUST SIMPLY GET THE HELL OUT of our democracy. Period.

If they want to retain secrets or trade secrets, they are free to go back to the private sector, where they came from."
The letter goes

I think from now on, judgment of the nobility of the legal profession will rest with how it allows or combats fascism.

Top of Page / GuvWurld Blog Home Page

Friday, February 04, 2005

Update on Contacting City Councilmembers

I made a series of phone calls on Thursday morning to thank Arcata City Councilmembers for agreeing to consider the No Confidence Resolution. I gave just a brief thanks to Paul Pitino who was the Councilmember to move the resolution forward. This alone is a tremendous contribution to the cause. Paul is content, however, to allow Councilmember Harmony Groves and Vice Mayor Dave Meserve to work as a subcommittee on refining the resolution.

In the last GuvWurld blog entry I noted that there were two open questions about how things would proceed now: timing, and transparency. In speaking to Harmony, it seemed the resolution would indeed get its hearing at the very next Council meeting on Feb. 16. From my conversation with Dave, however, it seems possible there might be a delay now that he has taken an interest in a potentially more urgent proposal brought forth by Brian Willson who wants to make Arcata a sanctuary for conscientious objectors to military service.

I regret that I missed hearing Brian speak about this at the Council on Wed and again last night when I made an early departure from the Vets For Peace meeting. Dave Meserve filled me in somewhat and I will certainly post future updates on this topic as support is likely to grow with increased exposure. So the timing for consideration of the No Confidence Resolution is still somewhat unclear though it is now definitely in the pipeline. According to Dave, it is still a possibility that it will come up on 2/16.

Regarding transparency, I am referring to whether the subcommittee will meet privately or with members of the public. According to Dave, it is by nature a private body though as the author of the resolution, I was assured that my input would be sought on proposed changes. To me this underscores the importance of community members contacting Councilmembers, especially Dave and Harmony, to lobby for the aspects of the resolution that are most important to leave as-is. Any such calls would be greatly welcomed and appreciated by me, but especially so for those who will emphasize the importance of the key frame "no basis for confidence." I also hope Councilmembers will hear support for keeping the reference to the Consent of the Governed. For a deeper understanding of why these are the most important parts, as well as to review a general list of talking points, please see the No Confidence Movement Campaign Primer.

Emboldened by this progress, I am also pleased to report that a call to Eureka City Councilmember Chris Kerrigan has resulted in an agreement to meet next week to discuss the creation of a town hall forum on Instant Runoff Voting. This is more than just a small piece of the otherwise comprehensive election reform platform that is the No Confidence Resolution. From a legal standpoint, the City of Eureka has all the right characteristics to become another IRV town. Eureka Councilmembers would be well served by hearing from constituents eager to see an aggressive policy of implementation.

Here are Councilmember contacts:



Peter La Vallee Mayor

Mary Beth Wolford Councilmember Ward 1

Virginia Bass-Jackson Councilmember Ward 2

Jeff Leonard Councilmember Ward 3

Chris Kerrigan Councilmember Ward 4

Mike Jones Councilmember Ward 5

Top of Page / GuvWurld Blog Home Page

Thursday, February 03, 2005

Arcata Receptive to No Confidence Resolution

At the conclusion of Wednesday's Arcata City Council meeting, Councilmember Paul Pitino asked that the No Confidence Resolution be considered when the Council next meets on Feb. 16. Apparently this is sufficient to secure the resolution's place on the agenda.

However, before adjournment, Councilmember Harmony Groves said that she and Vice Mayor Dave Meserve would like to review the resolution in a subcommittee. It is unclear whether this would delay formal consideration by the entire Council. It is also unknown whether the subcommittee would work privately or with members of the public. I will be making a round of phone calls tomorrow to thank all the Councilmembers and learn the answers to these questions.

I hope that it will be possible and appropriate to work with the subcommittee as the group's output seems extremely likely to me to pass the whole Council. I am even optimistic about the thought of not having further input as Harmony and Dave both have proven progressive stripes. In my opinion, whatever they develop together would also be extremely likely to pass the whole Council. I expect they would modify the eight recommended reforms, and it is a good bet they'll also tinker with some of the problems described in the top WHEREAS sections. I can be very flexible in those areas. I just hope the two most important ideas will remain intact, namely saying there is "no basis for confidence" and the Consent of the Governed is being denied.

On Tuesday night I made my usual appearance before the Eureka City Council. My comments could have been a little briefer but I'm not sure there would have been an appreciable improvement in the response, which was nearly nil. Still, the Council has encouraged me to continue presenting them with the latest controversial election information and so to some extent I am taking on the role of self-appointed Council reporter.

This week I delivered a copy of USCountVotes response to Edison/Mitofsky's Election System 2004 report. E/M's report was the CYA for the exit poll discrepancies with the official totals. USCountVotes is a bunch of Ph.D.'s in statistics and other math fields and they found E/M's report "incomplete and inadequate," noting that E/M published conclusions contradicted by their own facts.

Coupled with the recent news of more journalists on the government payroll, I emphasized again to the Eureka City Council that we can't know what to believe which means there is no basis for confidence in US federal elections. I used the opportunity to again request a town hall forum on election reform. One other data point I cited says that 43 states had official vote counts trending towards Bush as compared with the exit polls, 15 of the 43 were differentials beyond the margin of error, and that the odds are 1 in 1 trillion that this could happen by chance.

I mentioned that last point again to the Arcata City Council. The rest of my appeal basically spoke to what each Councilmember had told me individually since I submitted the resolution a few weeks ago. I acknowledged that they don't always want to take on national issues, but that this was one they saw fit to address last year with the Building Confidence Resolution (inspired by an earlier version of No Confidence). And since passage of that has clearly not brought closure to election reform efforts, it is appropriate and timely to engage the community on this matter.

I mentioned that I had been encouraged to call for a town hall forum which I'd be happy to see, although I haven't yet had any cooperation in setting it up. I commented that I understood changes were likely to be made, as Dave Meserve has made clear. And I concluded by following Paul Pitino's advice, which was to note that the problems are clearly established, we're working with a solution-based reform agenda, and that a town hall forum may be an unnecessary use of time and resources when the resolution is already ready for the agenda. It felt really right leaving them with two ways that would feel like progress to me.

I'll have another update in the next 48 hours as I determine what the Councilmembers see as next steps.

Top of Page / GuvWurld Blog Home Page

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?