Post by kjlowry on Jul 13, 2012 11:23:17 GMT -5
The following message was sent to the email list:
Absolutely! And I want to respond to KJ saying that Campaign Finance and Election Reform was the only grievance to get a passing vote of 90% or better.....Corporations Are Not People received a 98.6% and Protection of the Environment received 94.6%. I think it is important not to minimize anything we've accomplished here. Maybe it didn't turn out as some had hoped, but can you imagine the same process we followed if over 700 people had attended? We need solidarity not dissension.
Rebecca Lindsey
Missouri 8th
And then I responded like this:
Hello, all!
That higher percentage vote referred to was AFTER the original vote when we were told that ANYTHING OVER 50% would be assigned to a committee.
The first, original votes were to show the congress' opinion on whether a TOPIC should even be part of the declaration - those votes were trying to show which topics were the most agreeable to the people...and NOTHING got 99%. This is why I tried to get us to limit things to the topics that were HIGHEST and CLOSEST to allowing us to call ourselves the 99%.
The votes you speak of (taken AFTER the committees had done their work) were votes that were done under the assumption that the 50% TOPICS were ALREADY going to be included in the petition. Those votes were about approving the wording. People who disagreed with including the topic at all...were already defeated by the 50% ruling on the first vote. Once I knew that we were including anything that got over 50% in the initial vote, then the secondary votes were just "do I like that wording or not"? That is why the later voting percentages do not relate to whether the initial 99% Declaration should involve those issues. At least that is the way it appeared to me...if you disagree, please respond. Thanks, KJ
Here is how that original vote went in order from highest to lowest:
% of votes on Topic
96 Campaign Finance Reform
90 Election Reform
85 Corporations Are Not People
85 Money is Property Not Speech
82 Government Ethics Reform
80 Tax Reform
76 Protecting Consumers
75 Protecting the Environment
73 Ending Perpetual War for Profit
71 Protection of Civil and Human Rights
65 Employment
64 Ending the Communication Monopolies
63 Healthcare
60 Student Loan Debt
58 Criminal Justice
53 Immigration Reform
53 Veterans Benefits
52 Fiscal Responsibility
50 Puerto Rico and DC
43 Term Limits
Please respond to this here or on the email list and tell me if you think I got this wrong...if I did I really would like to see where I went wrong? Thanks, KJ
Absolutely! And I want to respond to KJ saying that Campaign Finance and Election Reform was the only grievance to get a passing vote of 90% or better.....Corporations Are Not People received a 98.6% and Protection of the Environment received 94.6%. I think it is important not to minimize anything we've accomplished here. Maybe it didn't turn out as some had hoped, but can you imagine the same process we followed if over 700 people had attended? We need solidarity not dissension.
Rebecca Lindsey
Missouri 8th
And then I responded like this:
Hello, all!
That higher percentage vote referred to was AFTER the original vote when we were told that ANYTHING OVER 50% would be assigned to a committee.
The first, original votes were to show the congress' opinion on whether a TOPIC should even be part of the declaration - those votes were trying to show which topics were the most agreeable to the people...and NOTHING got 99%. This is why I tried to get us to limit things to the topics that were HIGHEST and CLOSEST to allowing us to call ourselves the 99%.
The votes you speak of (taken AFTER the committees had done their work) were votes that were done under the assumption that the 50% TOPICS were ALREADY going to be included in the petition. Those votes were about approving the wording. People who disagreed with including the topic at all...were already defeated by the 50% ruling on the first vote. Once I knew that we were including anything that got over 50% in the initial vote, then the secondary votes were just "do I like that wording or not"? That is why the later voting percentages do not relate to whether the initial 99% Declaration should involve those issues. At least that is the way it appeared to me...if you disagree, please respond. Thanks, KJ
Here is how that original vote went in order from highest to lowest:
% of votes on Topic
96 Campaign Finance Reform
90 Election Reform
85 Corporations Are Not People
85 Money is Property Not Speech
82 Government Ethics Reform
80 Tax Reform
76 Protecting Consumers
75 Protecting the Environment
73 Ending Perpetual War for Profit
71 Protection of Civil and Human Rights
65 Employment
64 Ending the Communication Monopolies
63 Healthcare
60 Student Loan Debt
58 Criminal Justice
53 Immigration Reform
53 Veterans Benefits
52 Fiscal Responsibility
50 Puerto Rico and DC
43 Term Limits
Please respond to this here or on the email list and tell me if you think I got this wrong...if I did I really would like to see where I went wrong? Thanks, KJ