Wednesday, February 7th, 2007...9:00 am
Those Young Whippersnappers
A bit of a followup to something I wrote about a couple of weeks ago. At this weekend’s DNC meeting, Young Democrats of America. The YDA, which officially has three at-large members on the DNC, has been demanding that state parties be directed to recognize goals for recruiting young delegates, just as they are directed to set “affirmative action” goals for other groups. Arguments that this demand is unreasonable or unnecessary would be easier to swallow if the DNC’s own charter didn’t call for it. (Article 8, sections 3 and 4.)
Last Thursday, the Rules and Bylaws committee met. The DNC reiterated their argument that any charter language mentioning “youth” was obviated by a later resolution that didn’t mention youth. The dubiousness of this argument was pointed out by Mark Brewer, Chairman of the Michigan Democratic Party, who said that it is ironic for DNC members to scold the President for ignoring the Constitution when it becomes inconvienient, but the DNC ignores it’s constitution when it suits them.
Harold Ickes, long time Democratic magnate, was astonished by arguments that DNC staff was making that esentially said that the committee was powerless to enforce the DNC’s own rules. Further, he wondered why if the “youth” language was such a problem, why was no move made to remove it from the charter?
A call was made for a motion to support the DNC position, an ineffectual version of what the YDA wanted. No member of the committee was willing to make a motion to present the resolution. Then, one committee member made a motion to discuss the YDA’s resolution, and the chair ruled the motion out of order.
Later, action moved to the floor of the full commitee, where YDA members were told that they could not have signs on the floor. The signs, by the way, merely had the language from the DNC charter. Signs were actually against the rules, but the rule seemed to be selectively enforced. Chis Gallaway, YDA president and a DNC member, was told by a staffer that he could not hand out a letter to other DNC members. Gallaway wanted to know what rule he was violating and got an excuse rather than an answer. Gallaway smartly called for a ruling from DNC counsel on this. The counsel said that, yes, a DNC member is allowed to hand out materials to other DNC members.
This was typical of staff paranoia about the YDA. There were DNC staff members who seemed to be assigned to YDA members to keep an eye on them (complete with radios), worried about what they might be planning.
I wrote before that this was the “party establishment” versus YDA. But with the support of Ickes and Brewer (who also heads the Association of State Democratic Chairs), it is obvious that there are large parts of the Democratic establishment that support what Gallaway and the YDA are doing. Observers at the meeting think that had the resolution been allowed to get a vote, then it would have passed.
The opposition seems to be coming from the upper echelon of DNC officers and the DNC staff. The DNC officers are of the generation that the charter language, written in 1974, was written for. They kicked the door down, but now they want to make sure that it is carefully latched behind them. It is bizarre that a DNC led by Howard Dean, who got to where he is on the sweat of twenty-somethings, would treat the concerns of young activists this way. By the way, the first major party organization to support Dean for chair? You guessed it, the Young Democrats of America.
Another big irony is that the staff members who have been involved in the opposition to this are also young. A gripe from one of our Arizona National Committee Members, Janice Brunson, is that Dean has hired “too many young people.” This obviously hasn’t translated into a hyper-concern for the needs of youth in the party. As a matter of fact, the twenty-something staff members have been known to refer to the twenty-something YDA members as “whiny kids.”
This may also be tied in with some other problems within the DNC. There are moves by staff to decrease the influence of the DNC members from the various states, including plans to reduce the number of meetings of the executive committee. If your attitude is that the membership has too much influence, the last thing you are going to want is a group that is outside of your control, like the YDA, having any influence whatsoever.
As I said, the YDA managed to get support from many DNC members and State Chairs. One person who signed on was newly reelected Arizona State Chair David Waid. Waid has also pledged to put language to include youth in the state’s delegate “affirmative action plan.”
9 Comments
February 7th, 2007 at 9:20 am
Unbelievable! I’m the freaking Political Director for YDA and Prezelski scooped me on a project I was directing! He truly is amazing.
I’ll post some more details on my blog later if there is interest. I have to say - the whole thing was demoralizing to say the least. Let me be clear - the LOSING wasn’t demoralizing - it was the way we were “handled” as “little kids” by the staff that was demoralizing.
Everyone who knows me and my history as one of the “national leaders for Dean’s youth movement” (I can hear Ruben chuckling) during the last primary get why this stings all that much more.
We aren’t giving up though - next stop for us is state by state. To read the letter Gallaway was handing out on the floor (it has a FAQ too if you are interested) is at this link http://www.yda.org/file_download/22
February 7th, 2007 at 9:45 am
Now Dean’s DNC is unfairly treating young people and ignoring the charter. So lets add it up. According to Dean…
The Gays are trouble. LGBT Caucus Chair quits, LGBT donors angry, Dean abolishes gay desk. Barely provides resources to fight 7 anti-gay initiatives in 2006.
The Hispanics are trouble. Caucus Chair refuses to support Dean reducing the number of DNC executive committee meetings from 4 to 2, and resigns after being accused of being a racist. Hispanic leaders organize outside of the DNC for 2006 election.
The Youth are trouble. DNC refuses to recognize charter language, and publically snubs YDA.
The Unions are trouble. They organize outside of the DNC to hold Democrats acountable.
The consultants are trouble. Dean continues to slam them, but hires more of them than any chairperson in DNC History.
The pro-choice (and women) are trouble. DNC Women’s Leadership Council not funded in 2006 election.
Who’s next to fall out of favor with the Emperor who has no clothes?
February 7th, 2007 at 11:20 am
MYDD just did a story about this too … http://mydd.com/story/2007/2/7/123014/8322
February 7th, 2007 at 11:26 am
I was a district chair at barely 29 and I was the youngest person at the meetings by over 20 years and people wonder why? The youth need to have a say in both national and local grassroots if we are going to have an infrastructure that can sustain itself..
February 7th, 2007 at 2:15 pm
[…] Cross-posted from RR&R […]
February 7th, 2007 at 3:09 pm
This reminds me of little arguments I got in with fellow staffers here in Arizona last cycle. Most of us were young, I was the second youngest at 21. They couldnt see the value in trying to engage the youth in AZ, but even they would think this is bullshit, it looks like DNC staff just doesnt want anyone else on their turf. Demanding that the rules be followed is legitimate, and the duty of a real Democrat.
February 7th, 2007 at 5:13 pm
Interesting to me the Ickes has YDA’s back on this. He’s, uh, not really the most hip cat on the block. Makes me suspect that this could be a proxy-battle between him and Dean. Wouldn’t be surprising.
February 7th, 2007 at 5:49 pm
That is just messed up. I should normally gloat at the stupidity of it, but I am in ya’lls camp on this one. Young people should be engaged in politics in a way not filtered through “Rock the Vote” even if they are working for the wrong side.
Good reporting. Give ‘em Hell.
February 9th, 2007 at 9:19 am
On this topic generally I would commend a fascinating book on the formation and defense of activist politcal parties: “The Organizational Weapon” by Philip Selznick. Although it is a Cold War text (1960), its sociological analysis of a political party (Bolshevik), offers insight into many of the issues of intra-party maneuver and discipline (Democrats and Repulicans both) which have been recently of such interest here at RRR and elsewhere.
With regard to this posting about the YDA, consider this remark by Selznick: “…[T]he availability of peripheral organizations for tactical maneuver presupposes unquestioned dominance by the party.” As Selznick develops this concept, he offers some ideas which can help explain DNC twenty-somethings’ resistance to YDA twenty-somethings, for instance.
Leave a Reply