On John Hanna, Resolutions, & Steps for Success

I don't see any good faith on his part (2.00 / 1)

I think you would be a fool to believe him when he says that they wouldn't have gone through with their plan to send it down to a caucus if somebody had shown up. I believe his actions last weekend made the CDP look incompetent and/or extremely sketchy.

And how can he even talk about the rules after taking the unprecedented step of referring a resolution to a caucus (and the wrong one at that). The CDP Convention rules instructed him clearly:

9.(c) Resolutions Committee will present prioritized resolutions in the committee report to the convention body.

If he would have followed the rules and done his job, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. Hanna's shenanigans have been awful for the reputation of the party.

Twitter: @BobBrigham

---

by: Bob Brigham @ Wed May 02, 2007 at 16:22:03 PM UTC

Please don't go there. (0.00 / 0)

Nice to see you back, Bloggy! I almost thought we lost you. : )

Now come on. Do we really need to start a fight with John Hanna? He's offering us some advice on how to do better next time. We're in a position to let him know what can be done to make the process fairer. Why don't we all just have a rational conversation on what we all did wrong, and what can be done to make things better.

Sure, I was confused and disappointed by what happened with those resolutions. Sure, those resolutions weren't exactly presented in the best manner. Why don't we all work out these problems, and come up with real solutions?

As George Bush has learned the hard way, diplomacy matters. So why don't we exercise some on a matter as simple as resolutions to the Democratic Party? : )

Had enough of the "red county" right-wing crazy-talk bulls***? Well, then come and visit us at The Liberal OC! Yes, there ARE liberals in The OC! : )

---

by: Andrew Davey (atdleft) @ Wed May 02, 2007 at 17:12:04 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

what WE did wrong? (0.00 / 0)

John Hanna BROKE THE RULES. He had a simple job and failed to execute his duty as is clearly spelled out in the rules. Not only did he fail to do his job, he made up rules that didn't exist -- he doesn't have the authority to send a resolution to a committee.

I have no idea why he hasn't been removed from the Committee.

Twitter: @BobBrigham

---

by: Bob Brigham @ Wed May 02, 2007 at 17:36:56 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Meh (8.00 / 1)

I really struggle with the overall tone here.  Yes, there's a lot of value in what Hanna has been saying here, and that shouldn't be overlooked (we should all learn a lot from it in fact).  But I don't think that it's so simple as declaring someone friend or foe. Furthermore, I don't subscribe to the general concept that those in power should be cut slack or tiptoed around simply by virtue of their position.  I see no reason to genuflect because someone deigns to come to "our dear site" and I don't think anyone else should either.  It perpetuates the cycle of political hegemony that's anathema to direct democracy.  While this particular case has unique complexities, the overall point here- that we should be thankful for his charitable dispensation of wisdom- is not what I'm interested in.

---

by: Lucas O'Connor @ Wed May 02, 2007 at 16:43:32 PM UTC

Then let's learn from it! (0.00 / 0)

I'm not saying that we must worship John Hanna. And no, I'm not promoting any type of hegemonic relationship that could undermine direct democracy. No, I'm just saying that we all need to listen to each other... And perhaps, learn from our mistakes this time.

And yes, I do call John Hanna our friend. He's been active with the Democratic Party in Orange County for about THIRTY YEARS. And yes, he's been quite effective in ending the "red hegemony" here in OC. Hanna knows his stuff when it comes to the Democratic Party, and I think it serves us better when we work WITH him, rather than just pick a fight with him when it isn't necessary.

Sometimes, it's just better for us to work with our friends instead of launching a circular firing squad against them. That's all I'm saying. : )

Had enough of the "red county" right-wing crazy-talk bulls***? Well, then come and visit us at The Liberal OC! Yes, there ARE liberals in The OC! : )

---

by: Andrew Davey (atdleft) @ Wed May 02, 2007 at 17:03:07 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm curious (8.00 / 1)

As to what circumstances would be necessary before you felt the need to hold a Democrat publicly accountable for their failures, shortcomings, or errors.

---

by: Lucas O'Connor @ Wed May 02, 2007 at 17:50:22 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

When they're WRONG! (0.00 / 0)

And I have done that on several occasions. However, this case isn't really one of them. Sure, John Hanna came on here feeling cranky and frustrated. And yes, he took the wrong tone with us at first.

However, John Hanna then began to engage in some friendly give and take with us. He left here being willing to work with us. And now, we're all of a sudden willing to trash all this goodwill so that we can have a fight? Sometimes, fighting isn't worth it. Sometimes, it's just better to focus our energy on beating the GOP. Sometimes, it's better to focus on ridding our party of folks like Garry South and Bill Bradley... Ya know, the truly destructive forces working against Democrats. And sometimes, it's just better to work with folks like John Hanna, who are on the same page with us.

Fighting doesn't always work. Let's save our energy for when someone really is trying to fight us.

Had enough of the "red county" right-wing crazy-talk bulls***? Well, then come and visit us at The Liberal OC! Yes, there ARE liberals in The OC! : )

---

by: Andrew Davey (atdleft) @ Wed May 02, 2007 at 18:35:55 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

So then (0.00 / 0)

you don't feel as though the referral process which he presided over was wrong?

---

by: Lucas O'Connor @ Wed May 02, 2007 at 18:52:01 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I personally don't like it... (0.00 / 0)

But do you really think we'll be changing anything by whining and moaning and bitching about how life's unfair while we call on Art Torres to behead John Hanna? Sorry, but that won't work. Hanna has survived many other attempts at beheading before, and he probably would survive this next one. However if we discuss with Hanna how both sides can do things differently, maybe he'll work with us.

Cheese louise, why must we be lured into melodrama? Hanna's willing to work with us. Let's take him up on that offer.

Had enough of the "red county" right-wing crazy-talk bulls***? Well, then come and visit us at The Liberal OC! Yes, there ARE liberals in The OC! : )

---

by: Andrew Davey (atdleft) @ Wed May 02, 2007 at 19:22:25 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Because there's a much bigger issue here (0.00 / 0)

That goes beyond Hanna in particular, who I'm not particularly worked up about and who I didn't really discuss in the first place.  It's an issue of whether we're going to allow people in positions such as his dictate to us the terms of political participation.  The point of getting a wave of new delegates elected, and of being there to cover it, and of blogging in general is to refute the operational habits of the party that have led us to the failures which we now face.  Hanna has said he's open to working with us, and that's great as long as he is sincere and we follow through.  But again, this is a discussion that goes further.

While it may not directly apply to this particular case, the overarching mentality being suggested in the post is one of acquiescence if we think we'll lose the fight.  I have no problem with opting for a diplomatic approach when it's both available and pragmatic, so long as we keep a clear eye on who exactly is setting the reform agenda.  And when such an avenue is unavailable, I don't think we abandon a fight because the opponent may be too powerful.  Because then the whole goal of eliminating political feifdoms is defeated because we've allowed ourselves to be defeated by them.

---

by: Lucas O'Connor @ Wed May 02, 2007 at 19:42:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm not talking about acquiescence... (0.00 / 0)

I'm talking about actually accomplishing our goals. We can either learn how the process works in order for us to get what we want, or we can just start a fight and blow up boxes over nothing.

Now whether or not we like it, there are rules to this game. They're called the CDP By-laws. Now we can either learn more about the by-laws, or we can ignore them and cry "foul". I think it's more effective for us to learn how to play by the rules than to demand that we shouldn't be subject to any rules.

There are also common-sense ways for us to get things passed. We make phone calls. We forge alliances. We build coalitions. We make sure that our people stay in town to vote. We can either learn to do all of this, or we can just throw a fit and cry because the world is unfair.

I say we should live and learn. I think that's more effective than looking for a fight.

Had enough of the "red county" right-wing crazy-talk bulls***? Well, then come and visit us at The Liberal OC! Yes, there ARE liberals in The OC! : )

---

by: Andrew Davey (atdleft) @ Wed May 02, 2007 at 20:30:20 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Influence (8.00 / 2)

I agree, best to make the best of everyone.  The only thing anyone actually controls is his own behavior.  Everything else we can influence, but that's all.

Hanna showed up cranky and insulting, but left on a gracious note and gave some decent mentoring in between.  Sometimes the establishment needs to rant, too.  The constructive tone juls and others took reflected well on us.

I thought the whole thing was great, exactly what needs to happen as we merge the netroots into the heart of the party. 

I'm union staff, but not a spokesperson for my union - all posts represent my views solely.

---

by: Beth Caskie @ Wed May 02, 2007 at 17:51:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I agree in general (0.00 / 0)

That there needs to be constructive relationships built which will connect online activism with the existing party infrastructure.  However, what I found disheartening was that nowhere in the discussion between Hanna and the Calitics community did I see significant mention of netroots involvement being vitally important to the growth and vitality of the party.  Yes, there's a lot that we can gain by learning from folks like John Hanna and we should absolutely avail ourselves of that opportunity, but I bristle at even subtle suggestions that the netroots should institutionalize as some sort of path to power.  I don't disagree that we have to learn to operate within the system that we are trying to influence.  However, the online activist community has gotten to the point of having influence specifically because it offers a certain brand of political action that the party does not engage in.  Watering that down is a dangerous path.

---

by: Lucas O'Connor @ Wed May 02, 2007 at 18:06:03 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Never watered down, absolutely (8.00 / 1)

Never co-opted.  (I agree, we play the exact opposite role, and it's a crucial one.) Just urging us to be pragmatic in our communications, and therefore more likely to alter their behavior:

"A diplomat can tell you to go to hell in a such way that you actually look forward to the trip."  -Caskie Stinnett

Like that.  Otherwise, they'll never learn.  ;)

I'm union staff, but not a spokesperson for my union - all posts represent my views solely.

---

by: Beth Caskie @ Wed May 02, 2007 at 19:02:47 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yes, let's be wise with our influence! (8.00 / 1)

Let's see: Either we can bitch and moan and whine and scream, and forget about the actual values that we were fighting for...
Or we can engage with these party leaders, and try to learn from this experience by using our influence to actually accomplish our goals.

Yes, John Hanna showed up here cranky and insulting. However, he left here on a positive note, as he was open to working with us. You're totally right that we need to merge the netroots with the heart of the party, and THIS is the perfect opportunity to do so.

Not everything has to be an ugly brawl, and we'd be wise to notice that. Hanna wants to work with us. Now can we work with him to get what we want done? : )

Had enough of the "red county" right-wing crazy-talk bulls***? Well, then come and visit us at The Liberal OC! Yes, there ARE liberals in The OC! : )

---

by: Andrew Davey (atdleft) @ Wed May 02, 2007 at 18:27:11 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I think he should be removed from the Committee (0.00 / 0)

He blatantly failed miserably and broke the Convention Rules. I'm more than willing to work with people who engage in good faith and play by the book, but I also believe in accountability and think the most important thing moving forward is to cleanse the committee of those who broke the rules. This is an important test for Torres and I hope he does the right thing.

Twitter: @BobBrigham

---

by: Bob Brigham @ Wed May 02, 2007 at 18:32:43 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yes, and that's KEEPING John Hanna! (0.00 / 0)

John Hanna didn't break any rules. Well, actually he SUSPENDED THE RULES so that the other two Iraq measures could be voted upon. As my good friend Chris Prevatt said in the other thread, had those measures been added to the Perata resolution, we wouldn't have ANY Iraq resolution passed. And besides, it's not as if Hanna made the quorum call. He couldn't control what those delegates did on Sunday.

We should always hold our leaders accountable for their mistakes. But you know what? We should also HOLD OURSELVES ACCOUNTABLE for our own mistakes. Why didn't the authors of the net neutrality measures even bother to show up on Friday? Why didn't the Out of Iraq people round up their delegates to ensure that they'd be there to vote on Sunday? Why can't we learn how to be more effective at what we do?

I know we love to dish out the tough talk... But can we handle it ourselves? That isn't John Hanna's problem.

Had enough of the "red county" right-wing crazy-talk bulls***? Well, then come and visit us at The Liberal OC! Yes, there ARE liberals in The OC! : )

---

by: Andrew Davey (atdleft) @ Wed May 02, 2007 at 18:45:52 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

this just in (8.00 / 1)

from a delegate in our group......

Resolutions have yet to stop this

@#$% war. Yet if us in the hall still "fight", is it reasonable to expect peace?

Still tired and wired. Sunol=0=

---

by: taxismom @ Wed May 02, 2007 at 22:14:56 PM UTC

Moving Forward (8.00 / 2)

Thanks for this post. And to Brian, I've apologized, twice, for my tone in my initial responses. When you've been working at something for 20 years and virtually everyone comes away from the Resolutions Committee with the feeling that they've gotten a fair shake, the criticism came as quite a surprise. Stepping back I can see how some people are upset. Some have some legitimate issues. Some are chasing ghosts.  The Resolutions Committee will be working with the Rules Committee to make sure the process is clear and consistent with our Bylaws. We did a poor job of communicating those procedures. I think its in large part due to the vast number of new delegates drawn from the antiwar movement and members of the blogging community who are becoming activists in the Party. We've had a few sea changes in the past...I was part of one of them...early to mid 1970's delegates who came out of the anti-war movement and then again in the early 80's when the Party restructured itself, going from a State Committee almost exclusively comprised of candidates/officeholders and their appointees to one where 2/3 of the delegates were from the grass roots of County and A.D. committees.  The Party officers need to be sensitive to these new folks and their unfamiliarity with the processes. To the extent I was insensitive to new delegates I apologize.

Your Woody Allen quote is priceless...and accurate. Our standard reaction is if you don't show you don't care. I know that seems harsh and, in the case of net neutrality, wasn't accurate. But with 117 resolutions that included matters that were not properly before the Resolutions Committee(including bylaws amendments and legislation)we made decisions as best we could with the information we had at hand. We did send a prioritized list of resolutions(13 of the 33 that passed the resolutions Committee--the remainder go to the Executive Board in ) and we properly referred matters to the appropriate committees or caucuses. The Resolutions that passed are good, strong statements of Democratic Party positions and should not be minimized. personally, I would have also liked to have had us support Clean Money and would have voted to deauthorize the war but you don't always get everything you want.We'll be working with gary Shay and the Rules Committee to make sure that for resolutions timely submitted that are properly before the Resolutions Committee(as opposed to by laws changes or requests to support legislation)that procedures exist to take those to the floor via the signature gathering process. The constructive input of readers is welcomed and can be sent to me, gary Shay and/or the State Party. One last tip---to avoid the referral to the Legislative Committee, strip your resolution of the reference to the specific bil number and legislation title and have the Party support(or oppsoe) the concept of whatever the legislation is trying to accomplish. One of the things I am going to suggest as a change in this area is that when we get these resolutions in that belong in a different Committee that we in short oder inform the author of this fact and get the resolutions to the appropriate Committee so they deal with the subject right away.

Again, thank you for the interest in making the process better. Although its a pain in the butt(not to mention time consuming)to deal with all of this post-convention discussion, if it results in a process that is fair and efficient for the Party I couldn't be happier. And for the poor soul who seeks to have me replaced, make my day. Go ahead, call Art. I serve at his pleasure and believe me, I could be doing alot of organizing, working to pay the bills or spending time with the family that I now put into the this position. And while you're at it, don't forget those other co-conspirators, my 5 other co-chairs, if you really want to clean house.

---

by: jhanna @ Thu May 03, 2007 at 00:02:45 AM UTC

Thank you, Mr. Hanna! (0.00 / 0)

Thanks so much for coming here to respond to all the critiques, and thanks for engaging us in some VERY CONSTRUCTIVE DIALOGUE. I so appreciate your willingness to work with us on what the leadership can do better in engaging the Netroots and grassroots. And yes, thanks for offering us advice on how we can do better.

Yes, we are the new generation of activists who want to reenergize this party. We don't want to make the same mistakes of the past, but we also shouldn't be aiming for our own grave mistakes of the future. That's why it's good for us to listen and learn from such respected leaders as yourself. You probably know better than anyone else how to get stuff done in this party.

So thanks again, Mr. Hanna. And please do feel free to come back here any time to offer us all your words of wisdom as we offer you our two cents on how the party can do better. This is the type of dialogue that I so enjoy. : )

Had enough of the "red county" right-wing crazy-talk bulls***? Well, then come and visit us at The Liberal OC! Yes, there ARE liberals in The OC! : )

---

by: Andrew Davey (atdleft) @ Thu May 03, 2007 at 00:23:25 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

The Resolutions process (8.00 / 2)

John,

As part of the group working on saving San Onofre, I've come before resolutions three times now (first in August, then again in December, and this last time).  In preparation for the convention meeting, I ended up making several different charts of everything that could happen at the committee meeting. 

Boy do I wish I'd had those back in August and in December!

For those who haven't gone through the committee process before, it can be very, very confusing and just as frustrating.  While there is always room for improvement, I'm impressed with the ability of the committee to move through so many resolutions in such a short amount of time (although sitting in a room for HOURS on end doesn't seem short).  What's more, it's moving through so MANY important issues.

While those of us working on San Onofre believe our issue to be important, when we realized that we were going up against stopping the farce of a War in Iraq, Impeaching the President, High Speed Rail (YAY!), combatting Homelessness, and all the other very important issues, we felt a growing sense of doom that while saving a State Park might be important, maybe it wasn't all THAT important. 

The fact that enough committee members felt it was equally important to all these other issues was very gratifying. 

The bottom line is that while the Resolutions Committee process is very confusing at times, I believe that it must be complex in order to operate properly.  Many people don't see Resolutions as being all that important, but sometimes the greatest events in history begin with very simple statements (some statements by Martin Luther King, Jr., John F. Kennedy, and Cesar Chavez come to mind right away). 

The by-laws of the CDP, Convention Rules, and other documents currently give a decent start to understanding the process.  Only problem is, they are too simplistic and don't cover many things like:  Will an author be able to speak on a resolution?  Who is considered the author?  You want to speak on the issue and have some standing. Can you ask a committee member to yield time?  When should you ask them?  What happens if my resolutions is referred to a committee?

A guide that answers these questions (and probably more) would be very beneficial to those seeking to bring resolutions before the committee.  It could even be posted on the CDP website so that anyone can download it. I think the biggest problem coming out of this convention was that there was a lack of understanding of the process.  Part of that is because some of those involved might not have taken time to understand the process, and another (bigger?) part is that the information on the process is incomplete and scattered in several locations. We can't point to one place and say "Go read that and you'll understand!"

More than any other committee, I believe Resolutions is where those activists just getting involved with the party start out.  If the Party can make it a positive experience for them, maybe we could keep them involved and use their energy, their passion, to help get more Democrats elected (something I think EVERYONE here can agree on as a good thing). 

Dan Kirk

**disclaimer**
This post, and the opinions/thoughts contained herein are in no way connected to, authorized by, or meant to reflect on my employer or any issue I am working on at this time.

 

---

by: dkirk @ Thu May 03, 2007 at 01:13:41 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Now THAT'S a good idea! (0.00 / 0)

Can we all agree that ONE go-to reference on CDP By-laws that's readily available on the web site would be great for all of us? This way, we can just go on the web site and have all the rules right in front of us as we're crafting our resolutions? Posting the rules and by-laws would be a great first step to making it easier for activists to get the Democratic Party to reaffirm its values with resolutions.

Thanks for that gem of wisdom, Mr. Kirk. I hope we can all take your good advice here. And oh yes, congratulations on putting the party on record for saving San Onofre. Protecting our parks' integrity is NO MINOR ISSUE! : )

Had enough of the "red county" right-wing crazy-talk bulls***? Well, then come and visit us at The Liberal OC! Yes, there ARE liberals in The OC! : )

---

by: Andrew Davey (atdleft) @ Thu May 03, 2007 at 01:27:37 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Politics is easy. Comity is hard. (8.00 / 2)

As a delegate and county chair who watched but didn't wade into the fray on resolutions, I'd offer a few thoughts.

First, I appreciate Mr. Hanna's conciliatory comments today. Just as he got testy on this blog, it was clear that party leaders got testy in the face of loud and committed advocates. I was really disappointed with Art's repeated sarcastic comments and eye rolling in response to our demo brothers and sisters' passionate advocacy for issues they believed in. Hostility and disrepsect simply invite the same in return. Respect will garner the same. In spades.

Second, there is an amazing lack of wit and humor in these meetings and discussions. That was my seventh convention and I have never heard less humor and wit from the podium. We need to figure out how to sound more like Bill Maher and less like Bill O'Reily.

Third, I am struggling with the concept that resolutions sucked up so much oxygen in the convention room. While hundreds of energetic people are crawling over each other to convince each other about resolutions that may or may not have a real impact, activities that we all KNOW will have a huge impact - party building, precinct captain training, etc. - are relegated to off hours. Resolutions, as important as they are, are not going to get voters registered or get good Dems on their school boards. Something is out of balance at the convention in that we should be spending at least at much time figuring out how to reach the voters as we argue about what we want to tell them

Finally, I fully agree with the observation that education about the process is the key to effectively operating within it. As such, the greatest service our resolutions committee could do would be to put together a comprehensive and readily-comprehensible roadmap for effectively drafting, introducing and advocating resolutions. Something like "Resolutions for Dummies". Send out emails well in advance to warn people about deadlines. Encourage networking to people to work together to work out differences in advance. Figure out a way to podcast a video session led by 3 or 4 of our most experienced resolution advocates.

Imagine what an educated and witty delegation could make our convention look like. More like an enlightened body. And less like a mosh pit.

---

by: demoDan @ Thu May 03, 2007 at 03:54:02 AM UTC

More good ideas! (0.00 / 0)

And thanks for sharing with us.

Resolutions are good, but they don't sign up new Democrats. Party leaders can help, but not when they shun the activists. Activists do plenty of good, but not when they argue over frivilous internal matters.

Now yes, resolutions aren't everything. And yes, I'd prefer that we all focus more of our time on growing the grassroots and building up our candidates. However, resolutions really do express the spirit of the party. And yes, they do matter in that they set the party's policy. That's why we need to be educated on how to better pursue these resolutions.

Now these are all good suggestions. I hope that we take them. : )

Had enough of the "red county" right-wing crazy-talk bulls***? Well, then come and visit us at The Liberal OC! Yes, there ARE liberals in The OC! : )

---

by: Andrew Davey (atdleft) @ Thu May 03, 2007 at 04:52:07 AM UTC

[ Parent ]