Separate Fair and Proportional Plan

Separating Fair and Proportional votes (suggested by Kevin Prager)

---------------- Begin Forwarded Message ----------------
Subject: Two plans for representation
Date Sent: Tuesday, 13 July 2010 17:19
From: Prager Kevin <prager.kevin@hq.nato.int>

SEPARATING FAIR & PROPORTIONAL PLAN
In my experience, Country Committee members do not elect CC Chairs and Vice Chairs to represent their will at DPCA – e.g. when choosing DPCA's officers or a DPCA meeting venue. They elect us to lead local organizing in our CCs, and – as a very distant second – to help them raise their concerns to a higher level in the USA (e.g. DPCA party platform as it feeds into the DNC platform or DNC members).

Therefore, here is a skeleton for a plan by which DPCA could make some decisions with proportional voting weights and others with fair voting weights, depending on their primary relevance to DA members or DPCA members, respectively.

• Issues that affect primarily DPCA members should be decided on a 1-DPCA-member/1-vote weighting

• e.g. venue and date of the next meeting has nothing to do with membership size of DA Monaco or DA China, and everything to do with individual DPCA members' wallets and schedules – bringing country membership weights into a discussion that has no relevance to CC members is indefensible; similarly, I would argue that the elections of DPCA members' representatives (i.e. officers and RVCs who are elected to serve DPCA members' needs) has little to do with the wants/needs of country committee membership.

• Issues that should primarily reflect the will of DA's wider membership should be decided by proportional weight of country membership.

• e.g. convention delegates, resolutions, platforms, elected DNC members

----------------- End Forwarded Message -----------------