After a red-eye flight back from Las Vegas, I’m finally home with a little bit of rest. Depending on who you believe and which media outlet you listen to, good or bad things came out of the fall DNC meeting in Las Vegas.
One of the problems with many of these reviews, however, is they lack a perspective that gives any context to the happenings at the meeting. In order to get through that, I took my red eye flight and evaluated the good and the bad, and decided I would put forward a different kind of look at the DNC Fall meeting, a review of what was accomplished, successes, and disagreements, as well as a discussion of what happens next.
As always, I respond in comments, so if you have thoughts or questions, please feel free to ask.
The Purge
Much of the debate in news media centered around “The Purge”. Before we go forward, we have to talk about the fact that using terms like “purge” in and of itself is a loaded phrase designed to evoke an immediate reaction. A purge would imply a wipe out of the group. There were also some errors with articles provided. In some articles, it noted that none of the Bernie Sanders members of the Unity commission would be DNC members — this is obviously false, as Jane Kleeb (Chair of Nebraska), and Nina Turner (Our Revolution chair), as well as Larry Cohen (CWA) all stay as DNC members, by being a state chair, an elected D, as well as one of Perez at-large appointments in Cohen.
For those that believed that all were purged, that was simply false.
There were concerns about the elimination of some long-time members, such as Alice Germond and Barbra (Babbs) Casbar Siperstein. These changes surprised several. Chair Perez informed many that he believed some changed had to be made in order to find space for more Native American members, creating the first Native American caucus, and for more union leaders. Perez also argued that the inclusion of DACA members and a larger contingency of young members was important.
When framing a purge, a lot of confusion stepped into the discussion. One of the biggest concerns many had revolved around slots on the executive committee. The removal of some members from the executive committee, such as Raymond Buckley and James Zogby was the point which did frustrate many.
Buckley, who ran for Chair in the spring and called for significant structural changes in the organizational body, has continued to voice concerns about how those changes either are or are not occurring. His longstanding tenure on the DNC as well as vast institutional knowledge was seen by many progressive advocates as critical toward driving change on the committee. Despite being framed as a Bernie/Hillary debate, Raymond Buckley would certainly not be called a hard-core Bernie advocate; as a state chair he remained dutifully neutral and pronounces that anytime asked, and worked hard to keep his state’s role fair and even.
Before the weekend was up, Buckley was able to regain his Executive committee slot through a successful run for office in the DNC Eastern Region. Each region of the DNC provides four representatives, two men, two women, into the executive committee.
Other concerns — and legitimate ones — revolved around the Rules and Bylaws Committee. Changes in this committee, which are important going forward, bothered many as some voices were removed, like Buckley. While no member of the unity commission on Bernie’s side serves — a reasonable point of concern — there are several within the RBC who are seen as friendly. This is one of the issues the ASDC (Assocation of State Democratic Chairs) also had, and argued on Thursday night for changes. Those changes will put ASDC Chair Ken Martin (Minnesota DFL), on the RBC. Martin is viewed by many as someone willing to work toward success and who has been open in listening to progressive concerns. Still, several had expected a few members to be added to RBC who were not. This discussion will be ongoing.
While Dr. Zogby was unable to prevail in that same race, in several other caucus and council, progressive activists took greater roles in their representation of the party.
As an example, in the Midwest Caucus, Brandon Dillon (Chair-Michigan) and Stephen Webber became the new members of the executive committee through an election.
In council after council, progressives took slots. Whether executive committee slots - seen as very important - or regional representation on leadership councils within the party. These positions provide more progressive members a platform to advocate for a more progressive DNC.
Building a Reform Workgroup
Throughout the week, a breakout group, composed of members looking for tangible reform within the party and accomplishments that could be realized formed the Reform Workgroup. Several state party chairs, DNC members, Unity Committee members, and others joined this effort, which met nightly during the DNC.
The process of the Reform Workgroup was focused around explaining the process to members who were unaware, as well as building DNC reform policies that would be met with broad support and adoption by the body. Instead of just focusing on solutions that would be seen as an uphill climb or extremely difficult, the Workgroup would take a step back and look at ways in which the party could be improved and work toward proposing tangible solutions for the February meeting.
This group, which includes members like Dr. Zogby amongst others reflects a wide geographic and diverse membership of men, women, ethnicities and tenure with hopes of making real change. We don’t always all agree on every issue; but working together to build a network aimed at discussing success provides another venue for progressive voices to not just be heard, but to succeed — which should always be our end goal.
Rather than focus on only titles and process, groups can also choose to focus on getting wins. And with that, let’s talk about something significant that did happen.
Tangible, significant progress you didn’t hear about
Christine Pelosi has fought for changes in the acceptance of corporate dollars, especially those that conflict with the party for some time. On Wednesday night, there were still concerns with whether or not the proposal put forward would succeed.
During the meeting of the Resolutions committee, Friday morning, we had the opportunity to advocate for the resolution. I was happy to be involved in any way in the negotiation of the final product, but the victory for corporate reform is truly owed to Sandy Phillip’s call for leadership and the response of tens of thousands of Democrats around the country who sent in their statements of support.
Rather than worry about whipping votes, we spent time hearing from members who were grateful for the chance to make such a statement at this year’s meeting.
www.politico.com/…
LAS VEGAS – The Democratic National Committee on Saturday unanimously approved a resolution banning donations from corporate contributors whose work conflicts with the party platform.
The proposal, introduced by California member Christine Pelosi, would likely target businesses such as payday lenders and potentially others like gun manufacturers.
A few months ago, a similar proposal was roundly rejected. This time, thanks to the legwork of progressives everywhere, DNC members were able to go home and say proudly to their committees and Democratic members that the values of our party are something we don't just spout - we practice. There will be no acceptance of funds from organizations that wish us ill, no ability by them to use micro donations to clear their conscience while they work against our greater efforts.
There is work to do
Make no mistake, there is a lot of work ahead. There are also processes still working in the DNC that need to be changed and things which we can do better. No matter where you stand on the issues that face the DNC, no one denies that significant work must continue to be done.
Rather than focus on negatives, though, I point out to people that progressive roots in progress — a continual drive to be better. Members who have been with the party for years to new members can build bridges that work together on significant progress. Some of that progress was seen this week, through corporate donation changes, the creation of a Native American caucus, changes in our caucus structure, a renewed commitment to labor through additional selections, and a commitment to districts we don’t always touch.
There are also realistic concerns; expansion of officers resulted in a significant gender imbalance which has typically been something we have tried to avoid. And, renewed calls to change our understanding of gender, embracing non-binary gender types also looms before the rules committee. The body also needs to work toward a better development of our committees and growth opportunities for membership.
These tasks are all things which the vast majority of members are committed to, and they are items which unify, not divide us. While there will be competing proposals for how to resolve, no one voiced any support for ‘not resolving’ or ‘refuse to address’.
There will be arguments — heated at times — but they are arguments between friends for the most part. We risk taking arguments over principles and turning them into a social media “fight” that only works to prevent differing opinions from debate that can lead to solutions.
Glad to be home. If you have questions, please feel free to ask.