Two weeks may have passed between the Democratic Convention and today, but that hasn’t stopped us from speculating over what actually happened during that weekend. During these two weeks, everyone seems to have developed a theory on who knew what ahead of time, who was conspiring to silence the progressives, and who was really behind the mysterious quorum call. Two weeks have passed since then, and I’d like to do my part to end all the speculation NOW.

Last Thursday, I hopped on over to OC Drinking Liberally. John Hanna, Co-chair of the Resolutions Committee, also happened to be there. Pretty soon, hekebolos showed up, and we all went to the back room of Memphis to discuss what really happened at the convention. Later on, we also talked about what we can do better next time, but I’ll talk about that part of the discussion another time.

Right now, I’m inviting you to follow me after the flip to find out WHAT REALLY HAPPENED TO ALL THOSE RESOLUTIONS. I have been collecting information from a few brave individuals for quite some time now, and my meeting with John Hanna on Thursday put an end to my own speculation on all these rumors. So why not join me after the flip, so that you can also toss the speculation and just find out what happened?

OK, let’s start out by going through all those wild rumors. Here’s what true, and here’s what’s just wild.

– Rumor #1: There was a deal made between PDA and party leadership on impeachment- TRUE! Yes, PDA did meet with party leaders before and during the convention. A friend of mine involved in PDA told me that the party leaders knew about PDA’s plans for San Diego, and they did not want the convention to turn ugly. PDA agreed to soften the language on impeachment of Bush, the leaders agreed to tough language on Cheney, and everyone agreed to fold all the resolutions into one.

– Rumor #2: There was a grand conspiracy among the party leaders to “appoint” a delegate to make the quorum call- FALSE (well, kinda sorta)! Neither John Hanna NOR Art Torres had any advance knowledge of the quorum call. This makes sense, as Torres really did look bewildered and genuinely frustrated at the podium. However, other folks that I spoke with earlier did drop me a hint. They’ve called Bob Mulholland a “street fighter”, and they have suggested that he wouldn’t hesitate to pull a stunt like this. Hmmm, so does this mean we have a culprit?

– Rumor #3: John Hanna conspired to silence the true antiwar voices who wanted to “stengthen” Don Perata’s Out of Iraq Resolution- FALSE! He wanted the Perata Resolution clean, but he didn’t block the amendments by Karen Bernall (deauthorize the war) and the Hull-Richters (defund the war). John Hanna wanted to ensure that the Perata’s Out of Iraq Resolution ended up looking like what Perata wants to put on the ballot next February. However Garry Shay, of the Rules Committee, urged him to come up with a way to allow Bernall and the others (even the Hull-Richters) to be heard. So they worked out a deal. The rules would be temporarily suspended, so that the amendments could be split off from the Perata measure, and they could become their own resolutions. All the delegates can then vote on each proposal separately, and all sides can get a fair shake. John seemed sincere when he said that he thought the perfect deal had been struck, and everyone could get what he/she wanted… Until Karen Wingard stepped in.

– Rumor #4: John Hanna conspired with AT&T and CWA to kill the net neutrality resolution- ABSOLUTELY FALSE! Unfortunately, John Hanna and the party leaders weren’t as familiar with net neutrality then as they are now. So out of good faith that Jim Gordon would work out a fair agreement with CWA and AT&T on net neutrality, the Resolutions Committee agreed to refer it to the Labor Caucus. But now, John Hanna regrets taking Jim Gordon’s word when he promised John that he’d come up with a resolution in the Labor Caucus that “the net neutrality folks will like”. John told us that he didn’t know about the CWA/AT&T deep hostility toward net neutrality. And yes, he wants our forgiveness, and he wants to make it up to us. That’s why he’s willing to give us another chance to get net neutrality passed. (And I’ll talk more about this in a future story.)

Basically, John Hanna regrets what happened with many of the resolutions. He now says that he should have just allowed Karen Bernall to do a petition drive for her own “Out of Iraq” resolution, even though her resolution had been “gutted and amended” to make way for Perata. He says that he might change the rules to allow for this next time. He has also said that we weren’t given a fair chance to clarify what was about to happen to net neutrality. And yes, this might inspire some changes in the rules as well. I know that we were all let down by what happened two weeks ago, but let’s not allow these disappointments to stop us from doing better next time.

Now we know how the internal politics are played. And now, we have a better grasp of the rules that we need to follow. So let’s follow the rules (including whatever new ones that might actually make our jobs easier), and let’s get our agenda accomplished. And now that we have made amends with the past, let’s get back to making a better future. : )

OK, so many of you have probably seen this diary by now. And yes, I can understand the frustration of seeing CDP Resolutions Committee Co-chair John Hanna coming here to “talk down at us”. However if you look beyond the first comment, you just might find that Hanna is offering some pretty good advice. Hopefully, we’re all beyond anger at this point, and we’re ready to learn how to be more successful in passing resolutions and holding the Democratic Party to its true values .

Now I know that all of this is frustrating. I know that it sucks when we can’t get the party to agree to such no-brainers like net neutrality and deauthorizing the Iraq War. However, there are some important lessons to be learned from our failures.

John Hanna, along with other knowledgable folks in previous comments, hinted at some good secrets to success for next time around, and I’d like to talk more about these after the flip…

So what can we do better next time? Well, as Woody Allen would say, “80 percent of success is just showing up.” Whenever you’re writing a resolution, it might make good sense to actually show up to the committee meeting so you can make a case for your resolution. Just showing up for the meeting might be a good start in ensuring that your resolution gets a fair hearing.

However if you’re REALLY looking for success, it might also help to do some homework before the meeting. Call the other delegates in your area, and ask them if they plan to support your resolution should it come to a floor vote. Contact the Resolutions Committee members in your area, and ask for their input and advice. And oh yes, FOLLOW THE RULES and make sure that your resolution actually qualifies as one. How much of a waste is it when all your hard work gets thrown out the window when your resolution is ruled out of order?

So can we all agree on these points now? John Hanna only came onto our dear site to offer his side of the story, and to give us good advice for next time. Now I know John Hanna, as I’ve seen him in action here in Orange County. He’s no corporate shill, and he’s no “DLC establishment type” that’s out to “destroy the netroots”. He’s just someone who has been around this Democratic Party for a VERY LONG TIME, and now he’s offering us some good advice on how we can become effective agents of change in the party. And you know what? Maybe we should take it. : )

(Keep an eye out today for what happens at the Resolutions Committee today. The future of Trestles may hang in the balance. – promoted by atdleft)

For quite some time, all of us in Orange County have wondered what the state Democratic Party would do regarding the huge controversy over extending the 241 Toll Road to Trestles. Well, yesterday we finally received an answer. The party would try to reach a compromise between the labor groups supporting the 241 extension to Trestles and the environmental groups opposing this. However in the end, Democratic State Central Committee members may very well vote tomorrow to protect San Onofre State Park and Trestles beach from the reach of TCA and a possble 241 extension.

So what happened yesterday in the Resolutions Committee? And how may this affect the ultimate battle over Trestles? Well, follow me after the flip for more on what happened inside the convention center yesterday…

Just as everyone was ready for a epic battle over the future of San Onofre State Park, Resolutions Committee member John Hanna (who also happens to be from Orange County) offered a compromise resolution. It was not quite what the environmentalists wanted, and not exactly what the labor groups wanted. After some early confusion, the epic battle resumed.

Environmentalists first cheered when Hanna made this statement: “We must stand firm. We can’t support any highway, or toll way, to be built through a state park.” However, they stopped cheering when Hanna began to describe the mitigation options open in his compromise resolution that he as offering in lieu of the original resolution opposing any extension of the 241 into San Onofre. Basically, Hanna’s measure leaves open the possibility that environmentalists and labor can work with TCA, which would then work with the federal Department of Defense, the Navy, and Congress on a possible land swap deal that would give environmentalists comparable open space to protect, and labor the Foothill-South 241 extension that they want done. However if no agreement can be reached, then Hanna’s measure closes any possibility of a toll road that would rip through San Onofre.

In the end, environmentalists were ready to support Hanna’s resolution. And so was the Resolutions Committee, as they passed this resolution on a 16-7 vote. Even as a couple of labor people rose to decry this measure as infringing on the “good public policy” that was being made by TCA and Orange County politicians, their cries could not stop the Resolutions Committee from making the first step toward sending this resolution toward a full vote by the Democratic State Central Committee. At today’s Resolution Committee meeting, the committee members must approve the measure one more time, and place it on the agenda of ten resolutions to be voted upon at the floor by the full central committee tomorrow.

After the vote, environmental activists seemed pleased with the outcome. Nancy Mooney, of the Coalition to Save San Onofre, told me that this resolution that passed yesterday was not quite what they were hoping for, but they are ultimately happy that something passed. Speaking about possible mitigation options and a land swap, she said, “We don’t believe it’s possible to mitigate.” But still, she called it a victory. “Under that condition, we consider it a victory. We believe it’s good for us.”

But will today’s Resolutions Committee vote be good for Save San Onofre? And if the Resolutions Committee passes the measure onto the full central committee, will all the Democratic delegates agree to this measure? Stay tuned for more as all sides look inside the San Diego Convention Center to catch a glimpse of the future of Trestles.