DNC Delegate selection plan hearing

(updated: despite the fact that speakers for having the caucuses earlier than the primary outnumbered those in favor of later caucuses by 10 to 1 at least, not one member of the committee made a motion to introduce earlier caucuses. Eric Bauman of the LACDP introduced a motion allowing for earlier registration and publicly viewable registration dates as a compromise measure. – promoted by hekebolos)

I’m in the delegate selection hearing.  The current proposal before the board is a selection plan that would have the caucuses after the election.  Lots of people are unhappy with this, and Susie Shannon, the e-board rep for the 42nd AD, has submitted a proposal to maintain the pre-primary caucuses.

The vast majority of the speakers are in favor of Susie Shannon’s proposal, including me–I just went up to speak, and said that I want people to go to Denver for a candidate, not go to Denver for themselves, and that if the campaigns are too busy, then the DNC should do something to arrange a plan that doesn’t force states to compete against each other for relevance.

I’ll update this post as things go on, but right now it’s just speakers.

Angelides and Gore: In a big, green tree

Phil Angelides is a pretty self-deprecating guy, and you don’t hear much about his ego.  However, you know what, it means something to come back to this group of people and talk.  So, this time, he presented Al Gore’s slide-show for which he was trained in Tennessee by Vice President Gore himself.

If you’ve seen an Inconvenient Truth, you’ll pretty much know the slideshow. It’s the facts and figures you’ve seen for a long time.  But, Phil has his own perspective as a state treasurer and developer.  We’ll see what he does in the next few years in the private sector, but he has positioned himself to remain productive, and visible, in his-post electoral office days.

E-Board Labor Caucus: Net Neutrality Debate, and a Breakthrough

So I typed up a long transcript of the debate in the Labor Caucus on the two competing net neutrality resolutions, but the computer ate it.  So let me summarize.

When we last left our story at the CDP convention, the various net neutrality resolutions were referred to the Labor Caucus.  The caucus officers got together and put together a resolution that merged some of the elements of the other ones.  The chair of the Caucus is Jim Gordon, a member of CWA (Communications Workers of America).  Now, CWA has been pushing an astroturf campaign called “Speed Matters,” which advocates for building out high-speed networks by reserving a piece of the bandwidth for proprietary video services for the telecoms.  That is ludicrous, and a wormhole into overturning the principle of net neutrality and a completely open Internet for everyone. 

So Brad Parker, of Progressive Democrats of America, submitted a different resolution, one that demands equal access and no two-tiered structure on the Internet, where telecoms can extract payment in return for speedy content delivery.  And in the Labor Caucus this morning, both proposals were heard and a compromise position is in the process of being reached.  This is good news.  The caucus rank-and-file was clearly in support of equal access and net neutrality, and not for reserving any special services for telecoms.  Jim Gordon’s defense was that “if we don’t build out the Internet, it’ll tumble.”  Right, because they’re standing in bread lines at AT&T.  We all believe that it’s pathetic that the United States is 16th in connectivity in the world, but we do not believe that telecoms need another revenue stream to incentivize them to build it.  Indeed, the calcification of our connectivity is a DIRECT result of the laws being written for the benefit of telecoms who have no reason to innovate.  The Internet is the lifeblood of communication in America, and it cannot be controlled in any part by private interests, it should be like a public utility.

At the meeting, a compromise was reached, and the two competing resolutions (both endorsed by the Labor Caucus) is being merged into one.  Brad Parker is writing the new resolution and is confident that the bit about “reserving a portion of the bandwidth” will be struck out.  The people of the CDP have spoken, and I believe we will come out with a resolution we can all get behind.  I found that when you explain this issue in clear terms, people understand it.  It’s a free speech and free press.

Saturday, at the E-Board

And, you know what, It’s not the fourth of july. But everytime I think Saturday, I want to say, “in jim’s garage”. Oh well. 

Anyway, the meeting started off with a bang this morning. After getting lost in the innards of Sacramento’s northern manufacturing district, I eventua.ly found the Radisson on, I kid you not, Liesure Lane.  Good times.  I got here early to attend the Labor Caucus meeting, where they were talking about the Net Neutrality Resolution. I’ll let dday go into that discussion further.

Elizabeth Edwards (in the picture above, with Sen/Chair Art Torres next to her) spoke in the general session.  As always, she made excellent points, both in her own right, and for her husband’s campaign.  Whether John himself can get some more traction in the primary race, is, of course, another issue.

Following the wonderful Mrs. Edwards, Sen. Darrel Steinberg, Lt. Gov. John Garamendi and Board of Equalization Chair Betty Yee addressed the general session.  More will follow, and follow my flickr stream for more.

E-Board Meeting Friday Night

Back at our hotel in Sacramento with hekebolos after the first day of the executive board meeting of the CDP.  I spent most of my time in the Progressive Caucus, and since Donald Lathbury of the California Majority Report had his laptop with him and I didn’t, I’ll outsource the running commentary to him.

I will say that the caucus was once again the most well-attended, most organized group in the CDP, and I sense that people there are growing more confident in their ability to make real change happen within the party.  There have been setbacks, no doubt, but they continue on.

I will say something about the net neutrality debate tomorrow.  Brad Parker from PDA (Progressive Democrats of America), as I mentioned, will be debating Jim Gordon, chair of the Labor Caucus and a member of CWA (Communications Workers of America), tomorrow morning.  I’ll be liveblogging.  But the outcome of that debate, while entertaining, is irrelevant to what will happen tomorrow.  There will be two resolutions in the Resolutions Committee – one by Brad Parker, and one by Jim Gordon.  I haven’t seen the text of either, but I can safely assume that Parker’s supports the principle of a free and open Internet without discriminating against any content provider, no matter how big or small, while Gordon’s talks about “building out broadband access” and implicitly endorses the telecoms getting additional revenue streams by forcing content providers to pay them for high-speed access.  As Parker put it today, “broadband for the haves, and dial-up for the never-wills” is what the telecoms want.

So this will play out tomorow in resolutions, and Brian will have the inside scoop, I assume.  Meanwhile, Elizabeth Edwards will address the general session at 9:30 am tomorrow.

And on an unrelated note, our hotel is hosting the largest anime convention in Sacramento.  I’m the only one here without an oversized sword and a lion costume.  Hekebolos has his on right now.

UPDATE: I should mention that there was an informal and highly unscientific Presidential straw poll at the Progressive Caucus, and Edwards won overwhelmingly.

The results: Gravel 0, Dodd 0, Biden 1, Clinton 2, Undecided 6, Richardson 10, Obama 12, Kucinich 17, Gore 27, and Edwards 47.

I’m Baaaack/ Open Thread

So, I’m back in the state and back by my computer. I’ll be at the e-Board meeting in Sacramento tomorrow, so expect some live blog posts. I’m on the Resolutions Cmte, so expect resolutions-heavy posts from me.  I’m really looking forward to getting back into my California politics.

So…any openness here?