California Greens Put Nader On Ballot

By Lookout Staff

	Gathered at a meeting in Santa Barbara, party delegates - including Santa Monica council-members Michael Feinstein and Kevin McKeown -- voted 45 to three in favor of Nader. The result was Nader's first official support in the 2000 election from any of the state Green parties in the nation.
Keving McKeown and Ralph Nader  in front of  Santa Monica City Hall, October 1998.

Nader has not yet announced his candidacy. In fact, he has made it clear he
will not make his decision public until January, although he did ask Green
Party delegates in California to take last weekend's vote.

But California's November filing deadline for candidates had left the Green
Party in a bind. The party's only scheduled plenary before the cut-off date
fell on last weekend.

Although the party ultimately could decide to not run Nader in the general
election and the candidate himself could decide not to wage a presidential
bid, the vote of support in California hoists the Green Party into the ring
for Campaign 2,000. And party leaders are hoping the overwhelming support
among California Greens will encourage other state Green parties to follow
suit.

"This sends the signal that to Greens around the country that the chances
for a campaign are real because California is the 800 pound gorilla in
Green organizing," said Santa Monica Councilmember Michael Feinstein. "If
he's on our ballot, it makes sense for other Greens to do it elsewhere."

Most Greens believe Nader will run; if he does, this will be his second bid
for the presidency and his second go-around on the Green Party ticket. He
waged his first campaign in 1996 and finished fourth, coming in behind Ross
Perot with 700,000 votes.

Some Greens criticize the 1996 campaign, lambasting Nader for not being
aggressive enough on the campaign trail. Yet, others credit Nader for
boosting the party's recognition and registration and doubling the number of
states in which the party has ballot status.

Regardless, Greens want things to be different in 2000; they want a real
candidate who wages a full-steam-ahead campaign. Nader has agreed to spend
100 days campaigning on the road and 50 more in Washington, D.C., where he
now is headquartered, conducting media interviews.

If Nader positions himself with voters who consider themselves progressive -
not just Greens, but also disillusioned Democrats - the state's open primary
could give the consumer advocate a shot at voters that might otherwise vote
for Bill Bradley or Al Gore.

However, if a viable candidate emerges before November - or before the
general election next year - the Greens may shift their attention. The
party's primary is not binding; that means the state party could poll its
county parties and, if 80 percent agree, could add another candidate to the
March ballot.

And delegates at nominating conventions next year could decide to choose
another candidate instead of Nader to run on the party's ticket the
following November. So far, however, no other strong challengers have
stepped forward.

Still, the Greens are trying. A national Green Party coordinating committee
has sent letters to 30 potential candidates - Lani Guinere, Noam Chomskey
and Michael Moore among them -- inviting them to run. Most have responded
with letters calling the invitation an honor, but declining the challenge.

Success with Nader in 2000 could bode well for the party's future. If Nader
captures 5 percent of the national vote, the Greens will be eligible for
federal funds in 2004 - the party's first shot at public financing.