Here’s a quickie. That was the craziest scene I’ve ever witnessed. We went to the caucus at the Wynn. Imagine maids, chefs, cocktail waitresses, cool kids from the club, etc., all in a room doing politics. Nuts.
Clinton 189, Obama 187 in our caucus. Obama did not get a bump from the casinos on the Strip. A LOT more later. I could write a book.
For the record, there are a lot of allegations flying around about voter intimidation and voter suppression and all of that, on the Clinton AND on the Obama side (the Edwards folks are saying they just didn’t have the people and didn’t have the money). To be clear, I saw none of that at the Wynn, though of course, there was so much media there nobody would have been able to get away with it.
I’ll give a full report probably tomorrow.
P.S. The Nevada State Democratic Party is reporting that turnout is above 114,000 caucus attendees, with 88% of precincts reporting. That is a ridiculously high number. Something like 9,000 people voted in 2004. Another good day for Democrats.
P.S.S. The Obama campaign is claiming that they’re going to end up with 13 delegates to Clinton’s 12, because he outperformed Clinton in rural areas of the state. Indeed, in everything but Clark and Washoe Counties (Vegas and Reno), Obama won 55-45%. I have no idea if this is true, but considering the delegate count is what actually MATTERS, you’d think that this would be reported.
P.S.S.S. OK, I just spoke with Jill Derby, the head of the Nevada State Democratic Party. Regarding the Obama claim that he’ll actually get more delegates out of this, essentially that’s spin. Derby said that the caucuses are an “expression of the support of Nevadans today.” Around 11,000 delegates were elected today. That will be winnowed down at county conventions and eventually at the state convention in May to the 25 that will go to Denver for the DNC. In 2004, Kerry didn’t win every delegate on Election Day, but most of the delegates that eventually went to the DNC were his. Once there’s a presumptive nominee, the delegate numbers are subject to change. It’s non-binding.
If that makes your head spin, the short version is that this was a beauty contest, and you can’t project delegate numbers at this time.
On the question of charges of voter suppression and intimidation, which the Obama campaign is officially alleging, Derby said this (paraphrase):
“We had strict standards in place for what went on in the caucus room. Outside of the room is not necessarily our purview. We did get a few calls over the course of the day, and we did eject some people from the caucus room for engaging in tactics that were not within the rules.”
I asked her if she was going to initiate an investigation, and she demurred. She basically said that if Nevadans feel they have had their voting rights infringed upon, they should take it up with the “proper avenues,” which specifically she said was the courts. She also basically said that there was a lot of passion on both sides, and these kind of charges get thrown around in those circumstances.
Trying to be hands-off here, just the facts, ma’am. I can tell you one thing – this will not go away, and it could end up being a very big part of the conversation heading into South Carolina.
Yet another reason to love Air America: Stephanie Miller and Jim Ward are coming to the desert in support of Democrats of the Desert’s Annual Awards Dinner:
The money we raise supports Democratic candidates in the CA-45th Congressional district, the 80th and 64th California Assembly Districts, and the California 37th Senate District. We’re making Democrats cool here, at last, as Julie Bornstein recently exhorted us to do. KPTR is beloved of all Democrats out here, and they’re giving our sponsors one heck of a deal. Tell your friends, and come out to the Palm Springs area this April to party with us. Stephanie Miller!
It looks like Carmen Chu has decided to take on the punishment that involves running for Supervisor in the 4th District, often called the “Sunset seat”.
San Francisco Supervisor Carmen Chu completed on Tuesday her transformation from a behind-the-scenes city employee to out-front politician, announcing that she would run for election in November.
Chu, who at 29 is the youngest member of the Board of Supervisors, was appointed to the board’s District Four seat on a temporary basis by Mayor Gavin Newsom in September and reappointed late Friday afternoon. She is filling the seat held by former Supervisor Ed Jew, whom Newsom suspended for alleged official misconduct and who last week resigned.
But during several hours Friday – after the point when Jew’s resignation took effect and Chu’s temporary appointment expired at noon and five hours and 38 minutes later when she was finally sworn back into office – it appeared the newest supervisor wasn’t ready to become the mayor’s standard-bearer in District Four.
I will admit that I gave her a hard time when she was first appointed. She had just moved to the district and I felt that she was just another Newsom hack who would warm the seat and follow his directions. However, she has proven to be honest, competent and by all accounts a genuinely down-to-earth person. Now, what remains to be seen, is whether she can navigate the shark tank that is the Fourth District, which is full of shadowy, ambitious characters. She has never before run for office and I don’t think she has much campaign experience. However, she is well liked and, after going through the Ed Jew experience, she may be a fresh face that everyone is looking for.
In 1983, 50 corporations controlled the vast majority of all news media in the U.S.
…
in 2000, the number had fallen to six. Since then, there have been more mergers and the scope has expanded to include new media like the Internet market. More than 1 in 4 Internet users in the U.S. now log in with AOL Time-Warner, the world’s largest media corporation.
In 2004, Bagdikian’s revised and expanded book, The New Media Monopoly, shows that only 5 huge corporations — Time Warner, Disney, Murdoch’s News Corporation, Bertelsmann of Germany, and Viacom (formerly CBS) — now control most of the media industry in the U.S. General Electric’s NBC is a close sixth.
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) was created in 1934 with jurisdiction over radio, interstate telephone communication, and later television. But the FCC has always struggled with a fundamental lack of clarity about its proper functions. In its mission to serve the public interest, should the FCC crack down on indecency on the airwaves? Should it use its power to rescind the licenses of wayward stations?
Get background information on some of the FCC’s more recent decisions below:
Local Radio Ownership Rule, National TV Ownership Rule enacted. A broadcaster cannot own television stations that reach more than 35% of the nation’s homes.
1946
Dual Television Network Rule enacted, prohibiting a major network from buying another major network.
1964
Local TV Multiple Ownership Rule enacted, prohibiting a broadcaster from owning more than one television station in the same market, unless there are at least eight stations in the market.
…
1981 [Reagan Presidency]
Reagan Administration deregulation under the leadership of FCC Chairman Mark Fowler. Deregulatory moves, some made by Congress, others by the FCC included extending television licenses to five years from three in 1981. The number of television stations any single entity could owngrew from seven in 1981 to 12 in 1985.
1985 [Reagan Presidency]
Guidelines for minimal amounts of non-entertainment programming are abolished. FCC guidelines on how much advertising can be carried per hour are eliminated.
1987 [Reagan Presidency]
“Fairness Doctrine” eliminated. At its founding the FCC viewed the stations to which it granted licenses as “public trustee” – and required that they made every reasonable attempt to cover contrasting points of views.
…
1996 [Clinton Presidency]
President Clinton signs the Telecommunications Act of 1996. It is generally regarded as the most important legislation regulating media ownership in over a decade. The radio industry experiences unprecedented consolidation after the 40-station ownership cap is lifted.
Does Clinton regret the Media Merger Mania he unleashed?
It’s not clear:
Bill Clinton’s Take On Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal
8/6/2007
The Fallout From the Telecommunications Act of 1996
* Lifted the limit on how many radio stations one company could own. The cap had been set at 40 stations. It made possible the creation of radio giants like Clear Channel, with more than 1,200 stations, and led to a substantial drop in the number of minority station owners, homogenization of play lists, and less local news.
* Lifted from 12 the number of local TV stations any one corporation could own, and expanded the limit on audience reach. One company had been allowed to own stations that reached up to a quarter of U.S. TV households. The Act raised that national cap to 35 percent. These changes spurred huge media mergers and greatly increased media concentration. Together, just five companies – Viacom, the parent of CBS, Disney, owner of ABC, News Corp, NBC and AOL, owner of Time Warner, now control 75 percent of all prime-time viewing.
…
* The Act gave broadcasters, for free, valuable digital TV licenses that could have brought in up to $70 billion to the federal treasury if they had been auctioned off. Broadcasters, who claimed they deserved these free licenses because they serve the public, have largely ignored their public interest obligations, failing to provide substantive local news and public affairs reporting and coverage of congressional, local and state elections.
* The Act reduced broadcasters’ accountability to the public by extending the term of a broadcast license from five to eight years, and made it more difficult for citizens to challenge those license renewals.
One Candidate has spoken out against this senseless consolidation of the Free Press — that Candidate is John Edwards
8/6/2007
John Edwards:
“It’s time for all Democrats, including those running for president, to stand up and speak out against this [News Corp.-Dow Jones] merger and other forms of media consolidation.”
So far, Edwards is the only candidate to address this issue, and he deserves enormous credit for exhibiting such courage. The media is a potentially devastating enemy – just ask Howard Dean. However, Hillary Clinton has the greatest moral obligation to take a stand given what her husband saddled us with.
And Edwards has paid the Price for telling the Truth to the American People!
The price tag: being “Virtually Ignored” by the Media, and even being dropped from Candidate Polls, based on the arbitrary decisions of corporate Media Executives, and little else:
What is Edwards saying that they find so disturbing?
Edwards Comes Out Strongly Against Media Consolidation
Aug 2, 2007
Challenges Democratic presidential candidates to cut off contributions from News Corp Executives
Chapel Hill, North Carolina – Today, Senator John Edwards spoke out strongly against media consolidation which threatens the health of our democracy, by calling on Democrats to openly oppose and take the necessary steps to stop the merger between News Corp and the Dow Jones Company/The Wall Street Journal. Edwards called on Democrats to oppose the merger in light of the biased and unfair manner Fox News, and other media arms of News Corp, cover Democrats and the Democratic Party.
…
“News Corp’s purchase of the Dow Jones Co. and The Wall Street Journal should be the last straw when it comes to media consolidation. The basis of a strong democracy begins and ends with a strong, unbiased and fair media – all qualities which are pretty hard to subscribe to Fox News and News Corp. The reality is that Americans deserve more news outlets – not fewer. It’s time for all Democrats, including those running for president, to stand up and speak out against this merger and other forms of media consolidation.
Al Gore, another Progressive Statesman, has also spoken out just as urgently against this “wild west” atmosphere for evermore Media Consolidation:
Gore Lashes Out at Media Consolidation
by Jill Lawless
August 28, 2006
“Democracy is under attack,” Gore told an audience at the Edinburgh International Television Festival. “Democracy as a system for self-governance is facing more serious challenges now than it has faced for a long time.
“Democracy is a conversation, and the most important role of the media is to facilitate that conversation of democracy. Now the conversation is more controlled, it is more centralized.”
…
In the United States “the only thing that matters in American politics now is having enough money to put 30-second commercials on the air often enough to convince the voters to elect you or re-elect you,” he said. “The person who has the most money to run the most ads usually wins.”
Where do the other Candidates stand on the FCC, Media Consolidation, and the Fairness Doctrine?
It would be nice to know!
(The Fairness Doctrine, by the way, pre-Reagan era, used to require ALL qualified Candidates, get Equal Air time from the broadcasters, in exchange for their very lucrative broadcasting licenses.)
Edwards has the guts to take a Stand and speak out, like Al Gore did —
“One of the things we have a problem with in America is the conglomeration and consolidation of the Media.
We need to make sure that diverse voices are being heard, and we don’t have that kind of consolidation because that’s a big part of the problem.”
If the Trends set in motion by Ronald Reagan, and continued by Bill Clinton, are allowed to proceed unchecked as they have for 2 decades, this is the likely Future we will face
Instead of the “Big Six” Media Conglomerates —
we’ll end up with the “Titanic Two”
Fox and MSNBC!(and just wait til they merge)
If you think the Media stinks now —
just stay tuned …
and now a word from those Sponsors,
those VERY Special Interests down at www.MediaLobbyists.Inc …
underwritten and enabled by “Business as Usual” politicians, SPONSORS!
Last night we drove down to Carson City, where we placed door hangers for Barack Obama. Today, it’s another day of driving down to Carson City to observe a precinct down there. This is actually my first caucus, so that could be pretty fun.
Last night was, shall we say, an adventure. We got lost on our way down to Carson City, drove around trying to find some random house for half an hour. When we got there, we were told that we weren’t needed there any more. Oh well. We went back to the Carson City office, where we were sent out to the door hangers. Somehow I got stuck doing the hard labor of going out into the frigid night and placing the hangers. But, quite fun indeed.
Today, in somewhat of a last-minute fashion, Common Cause of California endorsed Proposition 93, the term limits reform measure. Common Cause is one of many groups who are opposed to term limits in their current structure on principle grounds, but they wanted to get redistricting reform at the same time. Nonetheless, they have endorsed Prop 93, along with a heavy dose of pimping for their redistricting measure that has been endorsed by the Governor.
Check the press release over the flip.
(Los Angeles) – California Common Cause today announced its endorsement of Proposition 93, a measure that will reform California’s term limits. “While we strongly condemn legislative leaders’ failure to adhere to their agreement to place a redistricting reform measure on the ballot along with the term limits proposition,” said California Common Cause Vice-Chair Roy Ulrich, “Common Cause has long believed that term limits arbitrarily limit the right of voters to elect their representatives from among the most qualified candidates while at the same time giving more power and influence to special interest lobbyists.”
Proposition 93 will give voters the ability to decide whether to keep their assemblymember or senator in office for up to 12 years. Under existing law, assemblymembers are limited to three terms of two years, and senators are limited to two terms of four years, with the possibility that a person could serve a total of 14 years in the state legislature if elected to both houses. If passed, Proposition 93 would allow legislators to serve a total of twelve years in the Assembly, the Senate, or both.
Although legislative leaders have failed to live up to their promise to place a redistricting reform measure on the ballot, California Common Cause has joined forces with the League of Women Voters, AARP, the Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce, and other groups and individuals to obtain the signatures necessary to place the California Voters FIRST Act on the November 2008 ballot. Presently, California’s legislators draw their own districts behind closed doors, which creates a serious conflict between a legislator’s self-interest in drawing districts that ensure his or her safe reelection and the legislator’s responsibility to serve the interests of the communities he or she represents. If passed, the California Voters FIRST Act would create an open and transparent 14-person independent citizens commission to draw district boundaries.
I’ll be brief because I’m blogging this from my iPod. Barack Obama finished a good-sized rally where he kind of lost the crowd in the middle but ended well. It was pretty much the same stump speech we’ve heard; I’ll elaborate later. But as we were leaving, we spied Obama campaign manager David Axelrod and asked him about Bill Clinton’s very odd comment that he personally saw Culinary Union bosses threatening to stop workers from voting for Hillary.
Axelrod lost it. He said, “I don’t believe it, and if Bill Clinton actually saw that, he can take it to the NLRB. This is the rankest form of voter intimidation I’ve ever seen.” And with that, he stormed off.
It felt like being on Hardball for a second.
(for my money, if Clinton does claim he saw a union supervisor threatening to violate voter rights, then he should take it to the NLRB.)
So we’re in the Obama press area awaiting his arrival (in about an hour, I’m told), and I had some time to write, and elaborate on what I told our Northern Nevadaticians over the phone.
We just got back from a Bill Clinton event in North Las Vegas at a local YMCA. There were about 150-200 people there, which seemed small to me. Bill came out and said he mostly wanted to take questions, and then proceeded to talk for about 45 minutes (hah!). It was a solid speech, completely extemporaneous, talking about the challenges we must face in the next four years and how his wife is best able to face them. But there was one glaringly strange moment.
over…
Specifically he honed in on subprime mortgages and the trouble with Big Shitpile (“people who have never missed a mortgage payment will lose their homes” because the banks will need to refinance to recoup their losses from bad investments), America’s stature in the world, and building a clean energy future (“Nevada is perfect for this – the wind blows and the sun shines, and we can capture all of that”). He highlighted Hillary Clinton’s “consistent record in public life of making positive changes,” including school reform in Arkansas, improving foster care and increasing adoptions as first lady, and the creation of SCHIP (“You need to know how the President responds to failure – with Hillary, it was SCHIP.”) It was a substantive, reasoned, and worthy case for his candidate. Here’s a paraphrase from my notes:
Obama says we need to turn over a whole new leaf, we must begin again. He has explicitly argued that prior service is a disability in picking the next President. Hillary wants to put the country in the solutions business. We must come together by doing. The purposes of politics is to live your hopes and dreams by making changes in people’s lives. Vision and inspiration is important, but so is perspiration and delivery. The ultimate test of our service is who’s delivered for the American people.
Which is an excellent case to make. He also said that he claimed he was in his hotel in Vegas last night, and a bunch of members of the Culinary Worker’s union came up to him and said that they weren’t going to listen to their union and they would caucus for Hillary. Which is fine. Then, he claimed, a shift supervisor or someone in a position of authority came up and said, “If you do that I’m going to change your schedule so you can’t be there to caucus tomorrow.” It’s a pretty amazing allegation (a union boss is going to threaten and intimidate the voting rights of workers in front of a former President?), and Todd from MyDD and myself have some calls in to Hillary’s press people to get some clarification. There’s no way to really independently verify it, but it strains credibility to believe that it went down the way President Clinton said. And he said it TWICE, so it wasn’t a slip of the tongue.
I do want to highlight this other moment. Among the mostly substantive questions that he eventually took from the audience, Clinton was asked where his favorite places were to travel. He took this softball, began a meandering audio travelogue of all these different places he’s been, rambling like an old uncle telling a story with seemingly no end, and then he told this amazing story about this woman in Rwanda who met the man who killed her son and how she forgave him, and he wrapped it up by saying we can all learn some lessons from every place we visit, and he went back over every place he named and gave some vital lesson that came out of it. It was like watching Michael Jordan do some behind-the-back, double-reverse, doesn’t-even-know-where-the-basket-is, eyes-closed and it goes in anyway bank shot. It was almost poetic. That’s Clinton’s real gift, to weave what he called “the story of America” and bring these arcane policy issues into some kind of immediacy for people, making it real to their lives.
Supporters of Governor Bill Richardson (D-NM) and his now aborted bid for the Democratic Party’s nomination for President have taken a new turn: They are petitioning to have Richardson named as Vice-President on the Democratic ticket, regardless of the nominee. Apparently, this new wrinkle is not authorized by Governor Richardson or the Richardson for President campaign.
Initially started a few days ago by Ken Camp, a Richardson volunteer supporter and blogger, who started a blog and petition drive (richardson4vp.blogspot.com); the move was seconded by another petition created by former Richardson National Grassroots Coordinator, Jeff Gulko. The two groups have now joined forces and have already received almost 500 signatures in the petition effort.
Today, Thom O’Shaugnessy and David Buchanan, who headed up Richardson’s volunteer and political initiatives in California, launched a new website, www.draftrichardsonforvp.com, complete with links to Camp’s blog and the petition, as well as news stories on the petition drive.
Asked by the Santa Fe New Mexican about the petition effort, Dave Contarino, Campaign Manager for Richardson for President, simply said, “You can’t stop the people.” It’s apparent that Governor Richardson has no plans in the near future to stop the petition drive or the grassroots movement to keep his name at the forefront.
“I whole-heartedly support Governor Bill Richardson, but I will delete this blog and the corresponding petition if asked to by Governor Richardson or any of his senior staff,” Camp wrote in his initial post. “I know the Governor has said he isn’t interested in being Vice-President, and if asked to cease my activities, I will.”
However, to date, Camp says he hadn’t heard from Richardson or any of his staff so far, despite some buzz about his project in New Mexico blogdom.
According to the website, supporters believe “…We believe Governor Richardson is the one person who can balance the ticket with a wealth of both foreign policy and domestic experience. Bill Richardson has balanced budgets 5 times, made New Mexico the clean energy state, and created over 80,000 well-paying jobs to the state.
Governor Richardson’s foreign policy and diplomatic experience is without equal. As a Congressman for 15 years, Ambassador to the United Nations, and confidante of world leaders, Bill Richardson has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize 5 times for his efforts in bringing hostages and captives home, negotiating ceasefires, and returning the bodies of our servicemen home from North Korea to their final resting place.”
On the day after the New Hampshire primary, according to Albuquerque Tribune, who interviewed voters, “But while a sample of voters interviewed Tuesday said they liked Richardson, they liked him more as the vice presidential candidate, whether with surprise winner Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York, runner-up Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, or third-place finisher John Edwards of North Carolina. (http://www.abqtrib.com/news/2008/jan/09/bill-richardson-would-make-good-vice-president-new/)
Support for the petition is growing, but are the candidates listening?
Despite my grumpy old partner, I am in Reno right now. Actually, Lucas is driving my car to Carson City while I type this. Why are we driving to Carson City? Well, apparently they needed more volunteers down there to put doorhangers on the houses of ID’d supporters. Fun stuff.
From the las Vegas contingent of Nevadatics, David Dayen reports that at a Bill Clinton rally without about 200 people in attendance. During the event, Clinton told the eventgoers about being repeatedly approached by culinary workers who said that they were going to caucus for Hillary despite the endorsement of their leadership. At which point, allegedly, a union leader threatened to change their shifts if they did that.
If that is true, these are amazing allegations against either a ruthless shop steward at one of the casinos or the unions. If it indeed occured, there is no evidence of any pattern of behavior like this. The good Mr. Dayen tells me that the former president didn’t give any information about the identity of these culinary workers or any other veryifying information. But either way, keep an eye out for more stories like this as we wind down to noon tomorrow.
