Solution:Resolutions 2008
From R-KIDS of MN and GPF
Resolutions and Motions To Introduce At Your Caucus
Here are some resolutions you may want to consider when you go to your caucus on Tuesday Feb. 5th, 2008 at 7pm. Some have precaucus cerimonies at 6:30.
- Please print this page out and bring it with you to your caucus. You can adapt any of these to fit your particular agenda.
- Find out how a Precint Caucus works.
- Print out a list of Talking Points
RESOLUTIONS TO ADD TO YOUR PARTY PLATFORM
One can introduce these separately or just the ones you prefer.
Party Resolutions to introduce at Precinct Caucuses on Feb. 5th, 2008, 7pm (be there at 6:30)
- For Democratic precinct caucuses call 651-251-6300 or 1-800-999-7457 for website www.dfl.org
- For Republican party caucuses call 651-222-0022 for website www.mngop.com
- For Independent party caucuses call 651-487-9700 for website www.mnip.org
- For Libertarian party caucuses call 651-646-8980 or 800-788-2660 for website www.lpmn.org
Judicial Accountability and Reform Resolutions
We support:
Resolution 1
1. Removing the word “Incumbent” after judicial candidate’s names on the ballots.
(all judicial candidates have the word “Incumbent” after their name on the ballot. No other officeholders have this privilege. It’s unfair to challengers and makes it more difficult to remove a judge)
Resolution 2
2. electing judges as spelled out in the Minnesota Constitution and opposing any proposals to eliminate or limit these elections, including the Missouri Plan or anything similar to it.
(There has been a concerted effort over the past few years to eliminate judicial elections in Minnesota. One of these plans, proposed by former Gov. Al Quie, would be similar to the Missouri Plan in which judges are appointed, but could be removed by the voters. Their replacements would then be appointed. This is not democracy! Judges should be accountable to the voters, so that liberal activist judges or other incompetent judges can be voted out. Thirty-nine states have judicial elections, largely because of the Dred Scott case of 1857, which was one of the most infamous case of judicial activism in that it abolished the Missouri Compromise, which many feel was a significant cause of the Civil War)
Resolution 3
3. having the legislature establish a January 1, odd year, starting date for new judicial seats, whenever they establish new judicial seats, so there will be elections for that new seat.
(currently, when the legislature establishes new judicial seats they do it on January 1 of an even year, so the newly-appointed judge will not have to run for election for six years, when he will be an incumbent. Doing it on January 1 of odd years would require that there be an election for new seats)
Resolution 4
4. filling judicial vacancies with people who agree to serve only until the next election, so there will be an election in an open seat when they leave office.
(This would be an admonition to the Governor, who, like many governors before him, has cooperated with the judges who retire in mid-term, thus circumventing the provision in the State Constitution which calls for elections of judges. This arrangement between the judges and the Governor could be ended if the Governor would appoint people who would agree to serve only until the next election)
Resolution 5
5. requiring that the voters for Judicial District elections be only those voters who reside in the county in which the judge is seated.
(Currently judges are “seated” in a particular county, which is the county they serve. But when they stand for election, they are on the ballot for every county in the judicial district, which in most cases is about ten counties. This elective process, combined with the “Incumbent: label makes it extremely difficult for a challenger to unseat an incumbent. It’s an “Incumbent Protection Plan”)
Resolution 6
6. establishing the Minnesota Rules of Judicial Ethics by statute.
(The recent victory of the Republican Party of Minnesota in the White case in which the U. S. Supreme Court ruled in our favor was brought about by the Supreme Court of Minnesota’s establishing anti-democratic rules in Canon 5 of the State ethical standards for judges and judicial candidates. The Supreme Court of the U. S. struck these rules down. But the State Legislature could and should establish these rules and remove them from the jurisdiction of the Minnesota Supreme Court.)
Resolution 7
7. Change the current plank ( Republican Party ) Section 6.A. as follows:
A. Electing Minnesota judges and appointing federal judges who will exercise their authority to review, and when necessary limit excessive awards of damages and attorneys’ fees
Family Law Resolutions
Resolution # 1
- Democrat - Gov't Accountability to the Public.
- Republican - Section 6: Strengthening the Rule of Law
Establishing Judicial accountability by having the House of Representatives appoint a special prosecutor to hear evidences of judicial corruption and oppression brought to them by the citizens of Minnesota. The special prosecutor can convene a grand jury to hear the evidences for the purposes of establishing a bill of impeachment.
Resolution # 2
- Democrat - Civil, Human and Constitutional Rights.
- Republican - Section 4: Strengthening Families and Communities
No parent should have their parental rights terminated without the option of a trial by their peers.
Resolution # 3
For the protection of Children and Families that only a felony of child abuse shall constitute child abuse.
Resolution # 4
That a child can only be removed from a home by a charge of felony child abuse.
Resolution # 5
That all who work within the system are fully responsible for the injustice they purposely cause to the accused and their families.
Resolution # 6
That those willingly taking part in a false arrest of felony child abuse will themselves be charged with a felony and shall be prosecuted as such to the full extent of the law for their action.
Resolution # 7
That all mention of fear be removed from state statutes that deal with child protection.
Resolution # 8
- Democrat - Health and Human Service
- Republican - Section 4: Strengthening Families and Communities
Presumptive Joint Physical Custody is to be the standard for all divorce and adjudication of paternity cases.
Resolution # 9
In all cases of dissolution of marriage, separate maintenance, or adjudication of paternity, both parents have an equal duty to pay for the actual cost of supplying the reasonable needs of their child or children had in common between them in proportion to the respective incomes and other resources. The best interests of the child shall be deemed met when this obligation is fairly satisfied as far as practicable after due regard is given to the self-support need of each parent.
Resolution # 10
Child support calculated cost must be based on marginal cost and not per capita costs.
Resolution # 11
All child support money must be spent for the benefit of the child.
Resolution # 12
The burden of proof for one parent to move a child away from the other must be placed on the custodial parent before a trial of their peer
Resolution # 13
- Democrat - Civil, Human, and Constitutional Rights, or Health and Human Service, or Public Safety and Crime Prevention
- Republican - Section 2 Preserving Civil Rights
That Minnesota law be amended to provide for services to all victims of Domestic Violence regardless of gender.
