Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Mike Gravel for President?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
NobleCynic Donating Member (991 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 12:51 AM
Original message
Mike Gravel for President?
I just saw this guy on CSPAN and decided to check him out. A former Alaskan Democratic Senator, he has a pretty solid anti-war background.

<http://www.gravel2008.us/>
<http://www.westerndemocrat.com/2006/04/western_dem_ann.html>
<http://www.vote.org/gravel.htm>

The anti-war background could be a strength, but I think the national initiative thing he talks about is a deal ender. The initiative process is perhaps the worst thing to have come out of the Progressive movement. Thoughts?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
crispini Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 12:54 AM
Response to Original message
1. Why do you say that about the initiative process?
Coming from a state who doesn't have that, it looks pretty good to me!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NobleCynic Donating Member (991 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 01:01 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. I come from a state that does (Nevada)
And moreover I've worked as a professional on six initiative campaigns. My take is that the power of money is even more obscene in initiative campaigns than normal politics. Think of the sheer logistics it takes to get 10% (The proportion it takes here in Nevada) of the registered voters to sign a petition. It can't be done through volunteer work. It takes paid professionals (And I will note on good days I make in excess of $50 an hour doing this, on average around $20) to gather the signatures. Without money it is logistically impossible to get anything done though an initiative. Moreover it is a process that rather than encouraging compromise, makes every issue an all or nothing affair.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:07 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. Why can't it be done through volunteer work?
Sounds like the base of the problem with it...

And we could USE a federal initiative process, IMO. Of some kind. It's the only way I can think of to push public election funding past a complicit congress.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NobleCynic Donating Member (991 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 11:36 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. In theory it can. In practice it really can't
Where and how you can gather petitions is regulated for starters. Usually you can't do it on provate property without the permission of the owner.

In Nevada, which is very small state, you need around 83,000 signatures to get something on the ballot. The printing costs for the petitions, paying for public notaries, and the legal costs for writing the petition alone will set you back at least 50K to 250K. (Proportionally more for larger states.) The big issue is being able to get eighty thousand signatures (10% of the voting turnout in the last election is how the number is set) in about six months time. If you assume an average gatherer can get 50 petitions a day, and only about 80 percent of those will actually be registered voters or are not duplicates leaving you with 40 valid signatures, you need approximately 2000 man days of labor to get an issue on the ballot.

In six months (180 days) this means it is theoretically possible to do it with just 10-12 people provided they have no other jobs, family concerns, needs for breaks or time off, don't have to account for travel time, and they don't face inefficiencies from overlapping territory or coverage. This is not a possibility for a volunteer force. With volunteer work, at best you can assume people will work two days a week, and then not for a whole day (This is hard gruelling work, especially in Nevada because of the desert heat.) At most you get a 1 man day worth of labor per week from a volunteer, meaning you would need an average of about 100 volunteers over a six month period of time. Add in a manager for every dozen or so to insure everyone has their own territory and to arrange transportation and you're at 110 people. Add another five for legal staff and coordination of the statewide effort and you have 110-120 people.

The difficulty of the work also complicates things. I have never been yelled at spat at, called a communist, called a traitor, etc. more in my life when I worked on a raise the minimum wage petition. Add in a hundred degree desert heat, being chased off by security or property owners, hassled by police (A legalize marijuana petition. They wiretapped our offices and set up stings against our volunteers. This needless to say discouraged alot of people from helping), and you will find you have a turnover rate of well over 75% within the first two weeks. This increases the number of volunteers you need over the course of the signature run by a factor of ten easily. I'm guessing you would need 1000-1500 volunteers because of turnover rates over the course of those six months to gather enough signatures. To get that many volunteers you would need an extremely solid grass roots network and a proficient media campaign, meaning in all likelyhood that you will need paid professionals yet again.

Given a population of about 2 million, you would think it is possible, if highly improbable, to get that many volunteers, but I haven't seen it done. The numbers explain quite simply why every there has never been a successful petition in Nevada without paid workers. Every single one that tried to get on the ballot through only volunteer work has failed. In California it is the same. No petition can be done without paid professionals. The size of the task at hand, the huge numbers of signatures that must be gathered is just too much.

Money money money, it just can't be done without wads of cash. To give you an idea of the amount of money involved, in California alone in the 2005 initiative campaigns 200-300 million dollars were spent.

<http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/11/09/MANDR.TMP>
<http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/rb/RB_1198EGRB.pdf>

The power of money, if anything, is more blatant in initiatives than in normal politics. No money, no initiative. It is that simple.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignacio Upton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 12:59 AM
Response to Original message
2. Two reasons not to support him
1. He's for a National Sales Tax, which would be a corporate giveaway is ever passed.

2. He's in his 70's. When he runs in 2008 he will be even older than Reagan was when he ran for his SECOND TERM in 1984.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Awsi Dooger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 01:06 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. I can think of another
The agony of defeat
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_In_AK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 11:40 AM
Response to Original message
6. I doubt that he has any hopes that he'll win...
I think he's just trying to shake things up and get some ideas out there for discussion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NobleCynic Donating Member (991 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 11:37 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. I think you're right
I think he'd a been better off trying to take Ted Stevens out in a Senate race instead.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_In_AK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-25-06 12:08 AM
Response to Reply #8
11. Yeah, we're stuck with Ted until 2008.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignacio Upton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 11:42 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. He reminds me of Jerry Brown or Carol Mosley-Braun
Brown in that he is running on a conservative tax issue while appearing as a maverick, and Mosley-Braun because he has no chance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ignacio Upton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 11:42 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. Delete.
Edited on Mon Apr-24-06 11:43 PM by Ignacio Upton
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 07:00 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC