Business as usual at the MA DSC: an outsider's view

If you don't want another Debbie Wasserman Schultz or Donna Brazile chairing the DNC, read on. You may have your work cut out for you. I'm an unaffiliated progressive voter in the Boston area. Like many, I was inspired by Bernie Sanders in the primaries, and furious when it was confirmed that the Democratic Party stacked the deck against him in order to nominate Hillary Clinton. My fury only increased when Clinton, and the Democratic Party generally, failed to win a race against one of the worst presidential candidates in history. Once the novelty of rocking back and forth in the fetal position wore off, I looked around and saw that there was at least one reason for hope: Bernie was vindicated. He doesn't want to give up, and now it seems he may actually have some clout. How does he plan to use it? Finding a better DNC Chair seems like a good start. I'll admit I don't know much about Keith Ellison (and it seems that only days after the endorsement, many news sources want me to doubt him), but I trust Bernie Sanders to at least nominate someone who would run a primary fairly. The bar is set pretty low, after all: as long as the next chair of the DNC refrains from actively cheating Democratic voters out of their chance to select a nominee, they'll be a paragon of virtue by comparison. I was heartened to see the generally positive reaction Bernie's endorsement got in the Democratic Party, even with the bigwigs. But it's by no means a done deal, and the people you see endorsing Ellison on the news are unlikely to represent you directly, or put much stock in your opinion. So, what can you and I do as individual citizens to influence the decision of the next DNC Chair? The DNC Chair will be elected in March 2017, by a confusing delegation of DNC representatives. If you want to have a say in the decision, those are the people you will need to influence. I decided to go for the low hanging fruit, and focused in on the most obvious players: "Every state chair and highest ranking officer of opposite sex in that state party." As luck would have it, the Massachusetts Democratic State Committee had a meeting at Quincy High School this Monday. I decided to attend and find out what I could about my state's Democratic leadership, and whether or not they were finally on board with some real change. This would be my first time engaging in any way with the MA DSC, and would prove to be very educational. [img]/files/DSC_Refreshments.jpg[/img] [i]Members and onlookers gather before the meeting begins at Quincy High School.[/i] I was admittedly clueless when I arrived, but a few questions revealed that I was doubly lucky: the primary agenda item of the night was electing a new [i]DSC[/i] Chair. Along with the next highest ranking member of the opposite gender, the DSC Chair would be one of the people voting for the next D[i]N[/i]C Chair. This gave me an opportunity to speak with potential leaders, although as an outsider I wouldn't get to vote. My mission was to talk with the candidates for DSC Chair, as well as Debra Kosikowski, the Vice Chair who would definitely be voting in March. I wanted to put them on notice that voters who would otherwise have no concerns about their activities were now watching, judging, and becoming involved thanks to the fiasco we had all just gone through. I also wanted to ask each of them two questions:

[b]
1. What are your thoughts on who should be the next DNC Chair, specifically with respect to Keith Ellison?
2. How do you feel about the fact that Donna Brazile, whose integrity and honesty have been heavily called into question, is still leading the DNC and will apparently continue to do so through March?
[/b]

Somewhat to my own surprise, I was largely successful, interviewing all but one of the candidates for the chair (including the eventual winner) and Debra Kosikowski. What follows are my impressions from the interviews as well as the meeting itself. It should be noted that I am not a member of the press. When I spoke with these DSC leaders, I did not record the conversation, and I did not write down their answers verbatim while they spoke. I took notes immediately after each interview and recorded everything I could remember, but I can only paraphrase and give my own impressions, rather than quote them directly. Candidates for MA DSC Chair Gus Bickford Gus was the first candidate I tracked down. When I asked him about Keith Ellison, he replied positively. Gus said that he was leaning toward Ellison, but of course hadn't settled on anyone and reserved the right to change his mind. This is a perfectly fair answer, but since it allowed him to tell me roughly what I wanted to hear with no actual downside, it's not exactly surprising. I would hear much the same from others. Question #2 proved far more interesting. When I asked him for his opinion on Donna Brazile, and expressed my consternation that Democrats had done nothing to condemn her behavior, Gus told me with a straight face that he hadn't thought about it at all, and had no opinion. Bullshit. I pressed further. I told him that I was deeply uncomfortable with someone so discredited being allowed to occupy the Chair of the DNC all the way through March, and asked Mr. Bickford if [i]he[/i] was comfortable with it. To this, he responded by saying that perhaps she wouldn't occupy the Chair all the way through March - implying, I think, that she might resign before then. Another shameless dodge. I asked Gus if he was comfortable with Donna Brazile occupying the Chair of the DNC [i]for one more day,[/i] and he retreated once again to claiming that he hadn't thought about it. It was at this point that the interview ended. The conclusion, for me at least, is simple: Gus isn't willing to speak at all honestly about the massive problems at the top of the DNC that led to this disaster. He cannot be trusted to right the ship with his vote in March on his own. Pressure will be required. [i]Steve Tompkins[/i] I was able to get a quick word with Steve right before the official meeting began. In reference to who he favored for DNC Chair, Steve answered that he liked Ellison, but also thought that Martin O'Malley would be a good choice. Like Gus, he couched this in uncertainty, so it's hard to take much from it either way. Tompkins took a slightly different tack with the Donna Brazile question, though it turned out to be about as disappointing. He agreed wholeheartedly that the situation was absolutely unacceptable - [i]if it turned out that Donna Brazile had indeed acted unethically.[/i] He managed to sound like he agreed with me while at the same time expressing no more of an opinion than Gus did. When I asked if nothing would be done to even chastise her behavior while we waited for a new DNC Chair to be chosen, Steve matched my frustrated tone and agreed that no one seemed to be doing anything! How outrageous! Argh... If you've seen many episodes of [i]The Office[/i], you may recognize this as a page right out of Michael Scott's playbook: When someone attempts to hold you responsible for a decision or action that you really should be making, but you don't want to make the hard decision or do the work, just pretend that you're as powerless as they are. Instead of the boss, you're suddenly just a helpless peon like them, railing against the injustice. Mr. Tompkins was seeking to lead the Democratic Party in one of the bluest states in the nation. He wanted to be the guy to cast a vote for the next DNC Chair. But when I turned to him for action, he pulled a Michael Scott on me. Conclusion: more weasel words. I came away feeling better about Steve than Gus, but on reflection, I can't find much more substance in his response than in Bickford's. [i]Steve Kerrigan[/i] I wasn't able to find Steve before the meeting began, unfortunately, but I felt like I got a decent impression nonetheless. In his short speech to the committee before votes were cast, Kerrigan stressed progressive principles and sounded more like Bernie than the others, mentioning the voters that Democrats ignored in the election and highlighting the importance of unions. He talked a good game, and if he stands by what he says, I feel like he would vote for a good DNC Chair. I also scrutinized a flyer Mr. Kerrigan's supporters were handing out that touted his qualifications, since I hadn't been able to interview him in person. On the lighter negative side, the flyer, "Produced in-house with volunteer labor," contains an unfortunate typo in a sentence about the importance of clear messaging and communications. You might say that's nitpicking, and you'd be right, but the flyer also got Kerrigan's own name wrong. Vote for Stave! Proofreading aside, I felt like Steve Kerrigan was the best choice for DSC Chair, based purely on my own admittedly tiny experience with each of them. He sounded like he was more on board with progressive change. The Results of the Vote I'll cut to the chase here and skip the descriptions of the meeting, the speeches, and the process, although it was all very interesting. Non-members like myself were packed into the balcony overlooking the proceedings, so as not to be confused with actual voting members. [img]/files/DSC_Balcony.jpg[/img] [i]The view from the cheap seats.[/i] In the first ballot, Steve Kerrigan led the field, with Gus Bickford in 2nd and Steve Tompkins trailing a distant 3rd place. Things were looking good for my top pick. In the second ballot, however, Tompkins bowed out, and encouraged all of his voters to back Gus. In the final tally, Gus Bickford emerged victorious with 156 votes to Kerrigan's 148. With that somewhat disappointing turn of events, the meeting adjourned and members began filing out of the auditorium. So, even though I hadn't met all the candidates, I had interviewed the new Chair of the MA DSC. Gus appears to have quite a bit of experience, including some in Washington, but this only adds to the establishment vibe he gave off to me in person. I still had one interview left, so I descended to the stage to seek out Debra Kosikowski, the Vice-Chair of the DSC who will also be voting in the DNC contest in March. Debra Kosikowski I went into the meeting with a positive view of Debra Kosikowski, as some quick googling revealed that she had criticized DWS for the primary debate schedule and waited till voters had had their say before revealing her superdelegate pledge. Nonetheless, her answers left something to be desired, although I have to credit her for not being as evasive as Bickford or Tompkins. Debra actually asked me if I was with the press, and when I truthfully replied that I was just a guy who was thinking of writing a blog post, she appeared to visibly relax and got more talkative. On Question #1, she had an interesting view, and one I hadn't been aware of: apparently the DNC Chairmanship can be split among multiple co-chairs. Debra said that while she liked Keith Ellison as a public face of the DNC, she thought he should be paired up with someone else who knew the ropes. This sounded okay at first, but unless the other half of the pairing was also progressive, it would just dilute the strength of Bernie's choice. Moreover, putting Ellison in front of the cameras while another (more establishment?) co-chair ran things [i]could[/i] be quite a bait and switch, and one that sullies the progressive co-chair if the DNC continues to act dishonestly. I didn't press Debra for who she had in mind to pair up with Ellison, though I ought to have. When it comes to Donna Brazile, Kosikowski really disappointed me. She was clearly, unequivocally more upset that Donna got caught stacking the deck than that she did it in the first place. When I tried to remind her that I was upset about Brazile's doing it, not getting caught doing it, Debra pointed out that Brazile's actions weren't actually illegal. This is a non sequitur. People want to see the DNC police itself for [i]unethical[/i] behavior, not just illegal behavior. It's about integrity - but apparently not for Debra. Conclusion Given what we've seen from the past election, the chair of the DNC and its leadership in general have shown how much power they wield over the fairness and outcome of the Democratic nominating process. If you want to make that process more fair and more representative of progressive ideals, you will need to put pressure on everyone who will be choosing the next DNC Chair in March 2017. In this MA citizen's view, two of those voting members, Gus Bickford and Debra Kosikowski, haven't shown that they're committed to righting the wrongs of the past year, or even acknowledging them. If they can't recognize that our previous chairs did a terrible job, can they be trusted to vote for someone who will?