The California Democratic Party "split the baby" on the six propositions for the May 19th ballot - endorsing Propositions 1B, 1C and 1F, while not supporting Props 1A, 1D and 1E. This shifts the dynamic for the last three weeks. No longer can Prop 1A's defeat be a mandate against tax increases - because the measure's "spending cap" is why progressives oppose it. Likewise, "no" on Props 1D and 1E is now a vote for the state to fund children's health programs and mental health services. And while many liberals fear the short-term "budget gap" if the measures all go down, the Party endorsed a "yes" vote on Prop 1C - which would have the most immediate impact. The Party's support for Prop 1B is a mandate for public schools - and while Prop 1A's defeat would prevent 1B from going into effect, a "yes" vote could pressure Governor Schwarzenegger to stop gutting education money. Democrats in the legislature promoted all six measures as a "budget package" to avert fiscal disaster. But it was a rotten deal, and the strategy would leave us no better off on May 20th towards a long-term solution. With this new dynamic, we can build momentum for scrapping the "two-thirds rule" in the state budget.
Thanks again to all of you who signed petitions and made phone calls and helped push the resolution to open a Congressional inquiry into Torture Judge Jay Bybee, which the California Democratic Party adopted at its convention yesterday. I have been told by the authors of the resolution that the pressure from the outside really aided their efforts.
The passage of the resolution was a beginning, not an ending. On the flip, come and join us in the next step.
UPDATE: Ryan Grim of The Huffington Post has the full story of the passage of the resolution at the convention.
This weekend was my second California Democratic Party convention and my first as an elected delegate. It was an enjoyable weekend, catching up with old friends and making new ones. I also had the opportunity to spend some time with some of our elected leaders, such as Barbara Boxer, Gavin Newsom, Jerry Brown, and John Garamendi.
As I look back on the weekend, I am reminded of what I wrote after last year's convention, including some themes that were clearly in evidence this weekend. From last year:
The Leno-Migden fight certainly reached a dramatic climax today, and the result was stunning. After the vote was finalized Eden James argued that it was a representation of the power of the grassroots within the party, and I think that analysis is absolutely right....Migden's failed endorsement is also further evidence, along with the rescinded AD-40 endorsement and the split over Prop 93 earlier in the year, to a huge divide between the party grassroots and the Sacramento leadership in particular. Senate Democrats and their staffers had worked hard over the weekend to get a Migden endorsement and the delegates would not go along with it.
Switch out "Leno-Migden" and "Prop 93" for "Proposition 1A" and you'd have essentially the same story from this weekend in Sacramento. Progressives flexed their muscle yet again at this convention, showing that they are the force to be reckoned with in the party - even if progressives did not always speak with a single voice. The refusal to endorse Propositions 1A, 1D and 1E was a sign that progressive delegates are not going to be dictated to by Democratic leaders, and that they feel empowered to say "No" when it is warranted. That's a sign of a healthy and mature progressive movement. People power is here in the California Democratic Party - and although it has yet to find sustained expression, it's only a matter of time before that power revitalizes the party.
There's a lot else to write about, but for now I'm just going to offer some impressions, written down on the train back from Sacramento (and a note to all Democrats running for a statewide office in 2010: the first one of you to come up with a credible plan to connect Monterey to San Jose via frequent passenger rail service and will swear on the ghost of the Del Monte Express to implement it will get my endorsement).
Progressive candidates did very well in the race for CDP officer positions, in particular Hillary Crosby, who will hopefully and finally bring some financial accountability to this party. John Burton is himself a staunch progressive, as his victory speech made clear (he denounced the war in Afghanistan, for example). He will be a powerful voice for social democratic politics as party chair, and it's about time we had one.
Chris Finnie in particular deserves a shout-out. Even though many progressives, myself included, voted for John Burton, Finnie impressed a lot of delegates with her campaign and her speech. She showed she was running not for her own self-interests, but as the standard bearer for those who wanted true and long-overdue reform of the party. John Burton in turn showed he too saw the need for change by promising to adopt the 12 recommendations for reform that Chris advocated in her campaign. Her efforts showed the value of a contested race for chair, and by sticking with her campaign she showed more guts and probably will have had more of a lasting effect on the party than the other chair candidates who quit earlier on.
If the governor's race settles into a two-person contest between Gavin Newsom and Jerry Brown, Brown's going to have to do more than wax nostalgic for the old days. His "recession reception" struck the wrong tone, as he became a kind of museum piece - the blue Plymouth in the drive (Update: According to Calbuzz Brown didn't know that the Plymouth would be there), the old mansion, old songs. I don't know if that's what he was going for, but that's how it came across. Even if Newsom's "stroll down memory lane" line is unfair to what Brown has accomplished in the recent past and his capacity to provide some direction forward, Brown has got to start asserting some truly new ideas and a new vision for the next 30 years. We'll have more on our sitdown with Newsom soon - lots to chew over there.
There was some early jockeying for position ahead of the 2010 primary, although hardly anyone was paying attention to the downticket races. There are no clear frontrunners or progressive champions in the Insurance Commissioner, Attorney General, or Lieutenant Governor races. But one thing is clear - Debra Bowen is beloved by this party and its base in particular. She's been an excellent secretary of state, and she'll have a wide and deep base of support should she decide to run for US Senate in 2012.
It may just have been me, but it seemed that there really was a new kind of energy among party delegates - a determination to build a party that's able to produce progressive change. I don't know how many of the delegates were new, products of the Obama movement, but where I sat (Region 9) a large number of the delegates were folks new to the convention who had been mobilized by the Obama campaign. They aren't the kind of people to tolerate the usual insider games, and they are motivated by a sense that change isn't just necessary, but possible. It's very inspiring.
I feel I reached the limits of what Twitter can accomplish for political conversation this weekend. During Barbara Boxer's press event I made some occasional tweets of her comments, but it just disappears into the ether, buried in folks' feeds among links to some swine flu article or Susan Boyle's latest hairstyle. Below you can see David Dayen's excellent liveblog of the debate over the proposition endorsements, which would simply have been impossible given Twitter's 140 character limit. And there is a robust conversation going on in the comments, much easier to follow and participate in than on Twitter. That's not to say that Twitter doesn't have its uses, but it would be a mistake to try and use it to do what we've done well at places like Calitics.
Add your thoughts in the comments. Hope everyone had a great weekend. Now, time to catch up on sleep...
UPDATE by Brian: Just wanted to remind everybody about two useful mobile tools for following our coverage of the CDP Convention. First there is the Calitics mobile site at http://wap.calitics.com. That allows you to read all front-paged diaries and comment in a mobile phone friendly website.
Headed out the door for a nice, leisurely six-hour drive through the Central Valley to Sacramento for another California Democratic Party Convention. Calitics will have full coverage, of course - many of our writers will be on hand, both as delegates and as plain old media. There's a lot to cover, from party elections to endorsements on the May 19 election to the resolution to impeach Jay Bybee from the 9th Circuit to the unofficial opening of the 2010 election.
The early pre-convention news is that Antonio Villaraigosa won't be making the trip with me (although there's still room in the car, so you never know). It's a confusing development, considering all the high-profile events other gubernatorial hopefuls Gavin Newsom and Jerry Brown are holding (Jerry's got a kegger at the old Governor's Mansion, while Gavin is part of an outdoor block party featuring Wyclef Jean). But that may be the reason, as Villaraigosa wasn't able to compete.
Villaraigosa's press office sent out a release announcing: "Mayor Villaraigosa today announced that he will convene emergency weekend meetings with union leaders to tackle the city's budget crisis.
"Talks will focus on ways to close a $530 million budget deficit through shared sacrifice and shared responsibility. The Mayor will begin meetings in City Hall with labor leaders on Friday evening and will continue through the weekend." [...]
Calbuzz asked Tony V spokesman Sean Clegg if the emergency budget session was "just a lame, bullshit excuse" to skip the convention. "It's exactly the opposite of that," Clegg said. "The city of Los Angeles and most cities across California are facing an unprecedented economic crisis and jobs come first."
Clegg said Villaraigosa is putting the needs of his city before his personal political fortunes by trying to pull together an agreement that would require labor unions to give back some hard-earned gains in order to save jobs and services in Los Angeles.
"This is a leadership moment. Antonio Villaraigosa is not going to Twitter while Rome burns," Clegg said -- a clear shot at the other mayor who would be governor: San Francisco's Gavin Newsom.
At the same time, a Tulchin Research/Acosta|Salazar pre-convention poll (which is three weeks out, but released on convention eve) shows Villaraigosa slipping. The poll had Garamendi in the race at the time.
Obviously, that top-line support is soft, with 1 in 5 undecided. But I'm frankly surprised how quickly this is turning into a two-horse race, which could actually open the door for a progressive movement candidate, if one existed. But alas...
Anyway, those are just a couple of the issues we'll see unfold. Stay with us throughout the weekend.
(I've teed up a few posts while I'm on the ride, but it'll be a light post day until late afternoon)
Arnold Schwarzenegger's Budget Reform Now group released their first TV ad yesterday, full of buzzwords and bullet points ("Hold the politicians accountable!") and admitting that the package includes a "spending limit," which is certainly further than the Democratic legislative leadership has been willing to go. But as one-line summations of the election goes, you can't get much better than future chair of the CDP John Burton, who took a pass on giving his specific voting choices for May 19, but who uttered this classic quip:
In any case, pressed on the question of whether his lifelong bleeding heart liberalism would allow him to back some of the permanent budget cuts that would result if Prop. 1A is passed, Mr. Almost Chairman responded with a classic Burtonism:
"I think when it's all over, the ones getting fucked will be the poor people."
Now, I could give you the charts showing how spending will be forced down and payments to the reserve fund mandated even in bad budget years, or offer the example of TABOR's spending cap in Colorado, which was disastrous. And I could follow you through the contours of this bad public policy and how it does nothing to relieve the structural problems that can get California out of the ditch. But I cannot improve upon that line. I've been critical of Burton in the past, based on the need for forward-thinking strategies at the CDP, but I've never questioned his liberalism. And you have to give him the credit for this, er, bon mot.
Since it referenced me, let me start by shouting out to fellow Calitician Lucas O'Connor, writing on the front page of MyDD:
Since approximately the morning after election day in November, Dave Dayen has been writing over at Calitics about the dramatic Congressional pick-up opportunities in California that were missed in the Obama wave. Specifically, Obama carried 42 of California's 53 districts (I won't even begin right now to get into the state leg breakdown which is also a debacle), including eight districts held by Republicans in Congress. Well all of a sudden this week, the whole world is waking up to the Dayen gospel.
Not only is the current statewide Republican registration of 31% a historic low, but for the first time there is not a single congressional, state senate or assembly district that has a majority Republican registration.
Apparently Bob Mulholland sent out a press release waking up to these facts last week. Now, I'm not going to hate on Mulholland for finally getting with the program. But let's make ourselves clear - this was true in 2006 and 2008 as well, and yet the state party failed to capitalize, by their own admission. So it's going to take more than one press release to show a commitment. Republicans have obviously become repellent to the broad majority of Californians, and they're too busy trying to recall each other to notice. It's upsetting that we haven't used this unpopularity in the past two election cycles, and I hope that the CDP can catch up with the curve.
They can start with effective recruitment. John Garamendi, who spoke to Greg Lucas as if he's still a gubernatorial candidate but who by all accounts will be running for Congress, ought to be pushed to run in the 3rd District, where he is the largest landowner and where there is currently no viable candidate to beat Dan Lungren in a district that is trending Democratic, instead of the 10th, where there are multiple viable candidates. Recruitment is an often-unremarked-upon but crucial element to winning elections.
Speaking of which...
• CA-04: This CapAlert piece certainly makes it sound like Charlie Brown might challenge Tom McClintock once again.
At the Jefferson-Jackson dinner at the Blue Goose Fruit Shed in Loomis, Brown and his wife, Jan, were honored as photographs flashed of Brown and supporters during four years of campaigning. The production was accompanied by songs from Bruce Springsteen's "No Surrender" to Neil Young's "Long May You Run."
And then Brown stirred huge cheers when he hinted he might have the stamina for one more try for Congress in 2010.
"We'll see what happens over the next few months - and whether you'll have the opportunity to get into any pictures again," Brown said.
In an interview, Brown said he is still mulling his prospects. He said he expects to decide by this fall.
We're big fans of Charlie here at Calitics, and should he run again we'll stand with him. McClintock would have the power of incumbency and a red-leaning district but the rumblings I'm hearing out of there signal that residents and local pols aren't all that enthused by the new Congressman's performance.
• CA-32: The LA Times weighs in with an overview of the 32nd race to replace Labor Secretary Hilda Solis set for May 19. They list Judy Chu and Gil Cedillo as the front-runners (though Emanuel Pleitez is profiled) and suggest that the race is a harbinger of the changing, minority-majority face of Southern California politics. They also mention the Betty Tom Chu controversy, as well as some allegations on the Cedillo side.
Judy Chu supporters suspect that Republican Betty Tom Chu, a Monterey Park councilwoman and a political opponent of Judy Chu, entered the race to confuse voters and harm the chances of her distant relative by marriage. Tom Chu said last week she did not have time to discuss her candidacy, but earlier told the San Gabriel Valley Tribune that she is running because she could not support any of the other candidates and wanted to offer voters an alternative.
Apparently motivated by concerns that the large number of Latino candidates in the race would split the vote in that group and give Judy Chu the edge, there also were signs of jockeying.
Democratic candidate Francisco Alonso, a former mayor of Monterey Park, and a campaign official for Democratic actor/filmmaker Stefan "Contreras" Lysenko each said Cedillo called them shortly before filing closed and urged them to drop out. A Cedillo spokesman said the state senator was merely inviting the others to "work together" with him and did not intend to discourage them from running.
Over the weekend, Cedillo won the endorsement of the LA County Young Democrats, while Chu garnered the endorsement of the state Democratic Party.
My Internet connection at the Bay Area New Media Conference is agonizingly slow, but I just wanted to call your attention to Joe Eskenazi's report on the riveting Regional Director race between Chris Daly and August Longo.
Intriguing Matchup for Next Democratic Regional Director: Chris Daly (Hothead) vs. August Longo (Convicted Felon) By Joe Eskenazi
When Supervisor Chris Daly tossed his hat into the ring for the low-profile position of Democratic Party Regional Director earlier this week, much of the ensuing media coverage focused on Daly's history of polarizing and combative behavior. In short, was this man constitutionally capable of handling a job that, essentially, calls for him to bring together various segments of the party and impartially organize meetings in which party endorsements are decided? Can Chris Daly be anyone's "liaison"?
Little was mentioned of Daly's six-year incumbent opponent, August Longo. Yet Longo's background is arguably more disturbing than Daly's past experiences walking out of meetings or engaging in shouting matches with members of the public. Longo, also a member of San Francisco's Human Rights Commission, was in 1981 indicted in New York of impersonating three different doctors, filling out false credit-card and loan applications, and passing more than 40 bad checks -- to the tune of $467,000. He pleaded guilty to nine charges involving around $125,000.
This post was written by Asm. Hector De La Torre (D-South Gate) and is being promoted pursuant to our policy to bump post from candidates and electeds.
Democratic Party activists have complained to me for years about the Party's finances. Alex Rooker and Eric Bradley have also been concerned, and shared their frustration with me.
If we agree there is a problem, then we need a solution. That is why I decided to introduce a Resolution at the upcoming Democratic Party Convention and asked Alex and Eric to join as co-sponsors: to fix our Party so we can get more Democrats elected!
But we can't do it alone. This common sense CDP finance reform resolution is the beginning of coming together for reform. I strongly believe that when delegates come together in support of this resolution, it will send a loud message for positive change throughout the Party.
The companion measure to our resolution is a bylaw amendment that will block cash payments to politicians' campaign accounts (especially those that are termed-out). I am confident that broad delegate support will build momentum to make this long-overdue change happen--to stop spending that does not meet our main goal of electing more Democrats at the federal, state, and local level and supporting worthy ballot measures.
I encourage every delegate, and every Democrat, to visit our website: www.LetsFixCDP.com and sign up for our reform effort. As we saw in November, we can accomplish amazing things when we unite for change as Democrats.
San Francisco Supervisor Chris Daly has filed to run for Regional Director of the California Democratic Party - challenging long-time incumbent August Longo. In an e-mail sent to State Party delegates (who will pick the Regional Director on April 25th at the annual Convention in Sacramento), Daly stressed his credentials as a "community organizer," and the need to build on the grass-roots success of Barack Obama. But Daly's decision to run also comes after Longo cast the lone dissenting vote (albeit through a proxy) at a S.F. Democratic Central Committee meeting against an immigrant rights resolution. Following that vote at the DCCC meeting, Daly objected to a motion endorsing Longo for re-election - but at the time, his colleagues overruled him 15-4. Longo now claims he would have voted differently on the resolution if present, but Daly says he's not running against Longo's record. The job of Regional Director, said Daly, can be transformed to engage the grassroots and push for progressive change within the Party. Delegates from San Francisco and San Mateo Counties will get to vote at the Convention, and the outcome is very much in doubt.
Now Democratic State Party Controller Eric Bradley, who is running for re-election, Assemblyman Hector De La Torre and CDP vice-chair Alex Rooker have taken a stand, and want to prevent questionable expenditures from the CDP. They are sponsoring a resolution that says, in part:
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the California Democratic Party supports common sense reforms that will bring greater trust and confidence in its ability to raise funds for campaign activities; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the California Democratic Party should approve reforms that prevent money transfers to termed-out officeholders or their affiliated political committees, and that Party monies and resources should be used only on party building activities and direct campaign support for candidates or ballot measures in each campaign cycle.
Eric Bradley was also endorsed by State Controller John Chiang, in a letter I received in the mail today. Here's what he says about Eric:
"I know better than anyone how difficult the job of Controller can be. That's why I respect the job Eric is doing and endorse him for re-election. The job of Controller isn't just about counting money. It is about coordinating the the fundraising and financial efforts of our party, and marshalling them to elect Democrats."
And now, here's what I have to say about Eric Bradley. Eric has extensive fundraising experience throughout the state, in the big counties where it counts. He is a progressive and he has come out firmly for reform within the party.
More than that, Eric was with us here in Orange County, when Debbie Cook ran for Congress. Much of her territory was in Long Beach, in Los Angeles County. Eric's Long Beach roots and connections helped her campaign tremendously there and were a factor in a Democrat winning the Long Beach portion of the 46th District for the first time. Eric was there offering support every step of the way. He's a true grassroots leader.
I'm supporting Eric Bradley for re-election as Democratic Party Controller.
I am both surprised and heartened to see DFA send their members in California information about the race for Controller of the California Democratic Party. Simply put, this is not a front-burner issue for most progressives, especially those not at the activist level inside the Party. But it's no less important, and in fact reforming the party and making it more attentive to grassroots concerns is paramount if we want to get back to leading the nation instead of lagging behind it. Let me reprint some of the email they sent to their supporters today:
Did you know DFA members first proposed a 58 County Plan to the California Democratic Party (CDP) four years ago? It's true and DFA members have worked hard to help make that commitment a reality.
This month, you have the power to make sure the 58 County Strategy is supported at the top level of the California Democratic Party.
The CDP elects officers on April 25th. DFA members told us months ago about a great grassroots activist running for Party Controller. We've followed the campaign, met the candidate and it's clear that one candidate has earned our unified support.
I'm excited to announce DFA's endorsement of Hilary Crosby for Controller of the California Democratic Party. Only delegates to the CDP can vote, but any DFA member can help Hillary win by making a few calls to delegates or contributing to her campaign.
We're talking about a grassroots movement to elect the Controller of the state party. Crosby's participation at the officer level of the CDP would be a sea change, a real difference-maker in terms of having a voice committed to the 58-county strategy at the table, and willing to follow up with action instead of words. The proof of the past two cycles signals the need for a broader strategy inside the party to win contested seats. And just the model for getting her elected - through a grassroots GOTV process - makes me hopeful that she gets it, and has the right allies to bring about change within the state.
Speaking for myself, I enthusiastically support this effort to help elect Hillary Crosby, in both form and function.
(Registration is an important feature as we look for opportunities to get to 2/3. Thanks for organizing all this data! - promoted by Brian Leubitz)
The Secretary of State has just published new voter registration statistics. Compared to the February 10 update, there were 115,300 fewer voters in California on March 20--46,445 fewer Democrats, 41,538 fewer Republicans and 23,295 fewer decline-to-states. Democrats now make up 0.03 percent more of the electorate than they did in February (now 44.55%), while Republicans make up 0.03 percent less (now 31.10%) and Decline to States have remained virtually unchanged (at 19.99%).
At the county level, Republicans have lost ground to Democrats in 36 counties, and gained on Democrats in 21. One county, Napa, has remained perfectly unchanged. The Republican registration advantage in Orange County, for example, has shrunk from 12.21 percent in February to 11.84 percent now. Similar leftward shifts (percentage-wise) are occurring in San Mateo, Alpine, Yolo, Sierra, Tuolumne, San Bernardino, San Francisco and Imperial counties. The only comparable Republican gains are in Kings and Madera counties. If the Orange County rate of Democratic relative growth continues (it most certainly won't), Democrats will outnumber Republicans in Orange county by 2012.
In the State Senate, there are 14 districts where the incumbent party has been losing its relative share of voters since February--nine currently held by Republicans (SD-01, SD-12, SD-14, SD-15, SD-17, SD-18, SD-29, SD-33, SD-35) and five by Democrats (SD-05, SD-16, SD-25, SD-26, SD-39). Only SD-12, SD-15 and SD-17 are competitive. All three of those are held by Republicans and all three already have Democratic registration majorities. SD-12 is the only one of these seats that is up in 2010 and is almost certainly the only 2010 Senate race that will be even close to competitive (Democrats have a 14.04 percent registration edge). SD-04 is theoretically possible to flip if we get a very, very strong Democrat (Republicans have an 11.05 percent registration advantage); but we'd probably wind up with a Democrat like Bob Nelson or Evan Bayh who'd vote against the budget anyway. Our best chance at 2/3 anytime soon is for Maldo or Strickland to quit.
The latest report of registration, current up to February 2010, shows that voters have continued to register Democratic in higher numbers even since the general election. There are now 17.3 million registered voters, 74.4% of all eligible adults, and Democrats have a 2.32 million vote advantage over Republicans. By the percentages, the state consists of 44.52% Democrats, 31.14% Republicans, and 19.99% decline to state, with smaller parties rounding out the rest of the voters.
2010 is the last year before a new census and new district lines, so the district-level numbers only apply for the next election cycle. Still, a close reading makes clear where Democrats should be focusing their registration efforts and resources for the next year.
In Congress, there are two Republican-held seats where Republicans hold less than 40% of the registration share, seen as a key dividing line. Those are Dan Lungren's CA-03 (39.7% Republican-37.7% Democratic) and, surprisingly, Buck McKeon's CA-25 (39.7% Republican-39.2% Democratic), which has changed dramatically over the past few years and could be ripe for a well-funded, legitimate challenger. Obama won that district 50-48 as well. With only 351,421 registered voters in CA-25, there are additional non-voters waiting to be registered there to tighten up those numbers even further. CA-19 also has a shortfall of voters which could lead to a tightening of the rolls.
In the State Senate, the only even-numbered seat (the ones up for election in 2010) that deserves a focus is SD-12, where Jeff Denham is termed out. There are 47.5% registered Democrats and 33.1% registered Republicans. Democrats in that region are fairly conservative, and so there may not be a progressive coming out of that district, but there's no reason on Earth why Democrats shouldn't own that seat. Especially since there may be 100,000 unregistered voters out there.
As for the Assembly, the numbers look good in AD-05, AD-26 (Dems have a 42-39 lead in registration), AD-30 and AD-36, with a few other marginal possibilities based solely on the voter reg. numbers (AD-38, AD-63, AD-64, and AD-65 come to mind). There is absolutely a path to pick up three seats and a 2/3 majority in the Assembly, if the net is cast wide enough.
Of course, oftentimes Democratic officials focus too much, in my view, on voter registration statistics, and shoudl recruit good candidates and give them the resources they need to compete instead. But in this off-year, registration stats offer an opportunity to determine where to target. You can dig through them yourself at the Secretary of State's page.
A man asked me at the region 6 meeting on Saturday what I thought Democratic values are. I didn't give him a very good answer, but I keep thinking about the question and would like to attempt a better one--because it is something I've thought about, because it's the reason I'm working with the party.
It's pretty obvious who the Republicans represent: the rich and the religious right. The rest of us are irrelevant to them. In fact, I think they'd be pretty happy if we just all fell off the edge of the flat Earth some of them still believe in.
That leaves the rest of us two options: the Democratic Party or a third party. Since our system is structured to make it difficult for a third party, that leaves us with the current two. Since I'm clearly not part of the GOP demographic, the Democrats seemed like my best option. But I can't say the party was exactly representing the values I wanted it to. So here's what I think Democratic Party values should be:
In the January Assembly district caucuses to elect delegates to the California Democratic Party, many people reported that union members showed up to support delegates running on a slate for Senator John Burton for CDP chair. Many of these delegate candidates were also union members. I spoke to several of these union members running for delegate at my AD caucus. Both seemed like fine people. Clearly they were dedicated union members. Neither of them were Democratic activists. They had no links to or experience with the party. But, in my district, both are now delegates--or, officially, members of the state Democratic central committee.
I am a firm supporter of bringing new people into the party. But I find this development disturbing for several reasons.
(Chris Finnie is a candidate for chair of the California Democratic Party, everyone. - promoted by David Dayen)
If you look at the Greek derivation of the word democracy, it means rule by the people. But, as I've travelled around the state running for state party chair, I frequently find myself speaking with incumbents who are running for other statewide offices. And what I've heard them say has little to do with democracy.
The California Democratic Party (CDP) Convention will be in Sacramento, April 24 - 26. Delegates will elect new Party Officers. With all the wrangling and agony we're having regarding the California budget, it amazes me that the CDP, as the home base for Democrats, has had very little visibility and is letting the media paint the budget problem as a 'spending problem' rather than what it is, a revenue problem. The fault, we are told, lies with the "legislature" not the Republican legislators, which we all know is the true case.
We need a State Party on the forefront of this and other issues. California has arguably the strongest grassroots activist and donor base in the nation (maybe the world) yet the CDP has little relationship with the thousands of volunteers and small dollar donors who will be needed to power a Democrat to win the Governorship and other offices in 2010. Hilary Crosby, seeking election as the Party's Controller, has the right finance skills and relationship to the Democratic grassroots to help bring the CDP to the 21st Century. Here is some information from her website (http://hilary4controller.org/):
Our Seat at the Table for Critical Party Decisions
As Party Controller, Hilary Crosby will be our seat at the table to make sure our grassroots voices are heard and our knowledge and experience are factored into critical decisions. Successful Party fundraising and implementation of the 58-County Plan will depend on both sound financial management and on a strong partnership between the Party and its grassroots. Hilary is the candidate with the right finance skills and perspective to strengthen and build the California Democratic Party.
It's been distressing to see the race for CDP chair turn from an election into a coronation, with John Burton lining up institutional support, muscling out the grassroots and forcing his competition to the sidelines. Coming off an historic Presidential election, with the demographics squarely on the side of Democrats and a new generation of activists who have boundless ideas to bring a different organizing philosophy to California, the right chairman of the Party could really leverage the energy and activity into something special, to lay the groundwork for a re-imagining of the political structure. Sadly, the best can be said of Burton is that he's an old workhorse, but there are troubling signs that he is unaware of the changes in modern campaiging, unconcerned with reforming the broken institutions both inside and outside the party, and unable to use the new energy and excitement to any decent ends. It appears that the frenetic organizing outside the party structure may be the only hope for progressives in the near term.
But it could be even worse than that. The new site Burton Watch offers a substantive critique of the former State Senator, with information that every delegate and voting member of the Party ought to know before turning over the reins to this guy. The initial post surveys how Democrats could lose California under this version of leadership:
Because the public instinctively knows that when power and money compete with the public interest, we all suffer. If you've ever registered voters or walked precincts for a candidate, you've undoubtedly been greeted with this response: "I'm not going to vote because it doesn't matter. All politicians are the same." And as the cynicism grows, voter turnout declines and the Decline To State registration escalates -- now approximately 20% of all Californians are registered DTS. So how do we combat the innate distrust that drives a large segment of our population to disengage from political parties and even voting? Well, Obama showed us a part of the solution [...]
When previously disenfranchised voters, minorities, and the young are all flocking to the Democratic Party because we represent a new way, a vision of hope and change, why on earth would we want to take a giant step backwards to the bad old days? And yet that's exactly what Democrats in California are poised to do this April. The California Democratic Party, instead of rising to meet the challenges of a new millennium with openness and inclusion, is set to reach back to one of the oldest and most entrenched political machines in California history for its leadership.
Enter John Burton, California's much older version of Rod Blagojevich. There are so many reasons why John Burton is unfit for the role of Party Chair in California, that I'll be doing a series of posts, each one dedicated to a disqualifying aspect of his background. All of the material I'll be using has been obtained through basic use of the google, and the state's Republicans could easily find and use it against California Democrats. And trust me, they will.
At the end of this series, I think you'll agree that John Burton is the wrong person to lead the California Democratic Party in 2009.
The next installment recounts perhaps the most infamous episode in Burton's past - the very public sexual harassment lawsuit brought by a former staffer, with excerpts from the complaint filed by Kathleen Driscoll in San Francisco Superior Court:
During DRISCOLL'S employment, BURTON engaged in hostile, demeaning and sexually abusive conduct such that DRISCOLL'S working conditions were significantly altered. His conduct over the past year easily rises to the level of severe or pervasive conduct for a hostile work environment sexual harassment claim both in California and under federal law. The harassing acts started in approximately September 2006. They consisted of numerous events, which took place throughout DRISCOLL'S employment, including but not limited to:
Asking DRISCOLL over the phone, "What are you wearing?" on approximately 10 occasions;
On one occasion, DRISCOLL sent a temporary employee to deliver paperwork to BURTON. BURTON ordered DRISCOLL to never send someone on her behalf again by berating her, "When you drop stuff off, stop in will ya? I mean I'm not getting laid under the fuckin' table."
Singling DRISCOLL out for exorbitant demands and attention, included but not limited to excessive demands for immediate and frequent meetings to go over routine matters, including on weekends after the work week was over in contrast to her co-workers;
There's more at the link, and it's pretty graphic. It goes without saying that women make up an extremely large bloc of the Democratic base.
I don't know what more Burton Watch will trot out, but here are some facts: Californians have little connection to their state government other than knowing that they don't like it. They hear things like how politicians are living high off campaign donations and it's both alienating and corrosive. The rules are already rigged in favor of a conservative wipeout of government and the last thing Democrats need as they seek to make structural changes is the spectre of an old-school pol with a lot of skeletons hanging over their collective heads. John Burton has the potential to take the state backwards and it's a chance that delegates should think long and hard about.
Congratulations to those brave souls who managed to win Assembly delegate elections over the weekend. Your first state Convention, scheduled for Sacramento in April, should coincide nicely with the mass protests from folks who got IOUs instead of their expected tax refunds, the first double-digit employment numbers in the state in a generation, and essentially the near-total shutdown of state government, by design, from a working conservative majority that uses outdated and anti-majoritarian rules to destroy the state for their own ends.
I have a hard time arguing with the deep pessimism from Dan Walters today.
What, if anything, will come next to pull us out of recession and return California to prosperity? Some think it will be biotechnology, services to baby boomer retirees or solving global warming.
Lurking in the background, however, is a nagging worry that there won't be anything, that the state's endemically high costs, political dysfunction and long list of unresolved dilemmas, from transportation to water to education, have made us uncompetitive in a global economy. Just last week, a new federal survey found that California has the nation's highest adult illiteracy rate.
We have tended to take the future for granted. No matter how moribund the economy may be at the moment, we think, we have the weather, the entrepreneurial spirit and the strategic location to regroup and prosper.
We may have. But then again, maybe we aren't so special. Maybe we're not immune to the societal afflictions that have beset other states. Maybe we are a rust-belt-to-be on the left coast, a Michigan with winter sunshine.
This is not a failure of entrepreneurship or a lack of a desirable consumer base. It's quite simply a failure of politics, a series of compromises and capitulations that have led the state into a blind alley. Because legislative Democrats have never effectively rid the process of the constraints of the past, they have made the future impossible.
The biggest burst of meaningful political activism in recent history was the crusade to defeat Arnold's special election in 2005. That happened outside the party structure because labor felt threatened and needed to lead an effort, working together with the grassroots and the party establishment to fight back. There was a singular mission and nobody brought their own single-issue buckets to the table. Their public relations strategy and the activism they encouraged was nothing short of brilliant. But it was primarily a defensive maneuver. Now the CTA is trying to add a penny to the sales tax in a more offensive maneuver to secure funding for schools. This is precisely the wrong way to go. It carves out another dedicated funding source for one area while imposing a regressive tax on the state's most burdened citizens. Single-issue money grabs will not do the job. Unity is the great need of the hour.
At one of the AD meetings I attended this weekend, my Assemblywoman, Julia Brownley, got up to speak. I would call her a pretty mild-mannered woman. She practically pleaded with everyone in attendance, saying "We need your help... the Governor is breaking this state... we need you to throw your shoes at Arnold." She was sending out an urgent call for the kind of unified activism that broke Arnold's back in 2005. It's a heavier lift because it requires something proactive rather than reactive. But without labor, grassroots activists and the party establishment working in concert, this is going to be the worst 2 years of all these newly-elected delegates' lives.
There are going to be two Democratic legislative initiatives this week: a request for a federal government loan to ensure our unemployment insurance fund doesn't go broke, and legislation putting a moratorium on foreclosures, which cost roughly $250,000 each to the greater economy in opportunity costs and property value reductions. There is help coming in the form of hopefully $5-7 billion dollars from the federal recovery package, earmarked for state and local government relief. But eventually, we're going to turn to the ballot. In June of this year, there's going to be a host of initiatives, and we need there to be more than simply signing off on the bad budget of last year, but real structural reform, whether to do with 2/3 or expanding the budget cycle to 2 years or even the tax increases in the Democratic budget (The LAO thinks that election should happen earlier to relieve this crisis of confusion). These MUST get on the ballot, and they MUST pass, with a coalition of every progressive in the state working toward that passage. The survival of the state hangs in the balance.
So good for you, winners. Now make sure you don't get picketed during your first convention. Because if you don't, I'll be the first one out there with a sign.
Yesterday on Daily Kos, I explained how my candidacy for Assembly District Delegate in AD-33 was a classic example of "crashing the gate." Younger volunteers from the Obama campaign are continuing to serve in their communities across the country.
In some communities, there is more than just a tiny bit of friction between us and the old timers and their clubs. I don't begrudge these long term volunteers their positions. But I do begrudge them their monopoly on local party positions.
If San Luis Obispo is famous for anything, it's probably the farmer's market. 20+ years before I moved to the area, I remember my family talking about visiting SLO to go to the Farmer's Market. Tonight, I went there and leafleted for my campaign.
