“It is my greatest hope that those who read this book will choose to become part of a new movement to rekindle the true spirit of America.”
  – Al Gore in The Assault on Reason

For those of us entrenched in the Draft Gore movement, we think we know exactly what that means.

And in California, we have been going full bore to qualify him for the Democratic Primary, whether he runs or NOT.  The beauty of it is, that if he doesn’t want to be on the ballot, he can simply ask Secretary of State Debra Bowen to remove his name.  And by law, she will have to.

And it will not have been a wasted effort.  We will finally have our Shermannesque statement.  Thus far, we have had nothing close to that.

We are 3 weeks away from the deadline, and are on the cusp of doing it, and things have gotten weird…

When I first stumbled upon the California Election Codes (back in March) that would allow this exercise in direct democracy, I was ecstatic!

It was a no brainer.  We would put Gore on the California Democratic Ballot and that would propel him into the race.  This is California!  It will be easy!  We only need 500 signatures (from registered Democrats) in each of the 53 Congressional Districts.  We will have volunteers lining up around the block!  It isn’t as if it is an open ended commitment!  Only 500 signatures.  That is 10 people per district, each collecting 50 signatures.  Cake!

The only catch?  Well…  Given a primary date of February 5th, the window in which to collect the signatures (tied to the primary date) is October 8th to December 4th.  So I can sit on my laurels for a few months and start organizing after the summer.  Luckily for naive little me, Roy Gayhart had other ideas.  He started organizing right away, and thank goodness for that because, well, we wouldn’t be here right now in the final stretch.

As I have stated, we have about 3 weeks left to complete this.  We have made progress across the entire state, but our volunteers are starting to loose momentum.  And that brings us ever closer to the Moment of (Inconvenient) Truth…

But let me step back for a minute.  The other thing I had been proud of in this entire event is that this had been a purely volunteer and grassroots effort.  We had an ActBlue page, but we really hadn’t tried to raise money for it.  (Draft Gore is people power, baby!)  Well…  Until last week…

See, as we came into the home stretch it became more clear to me than it ever has before that there is a Red California out there.  There are actually places where Democrats don’t wear their party affiliation on their sleeves (no news to those here, I am sure).  So…

As anathema as this may be, we were left with resorting to hiring signature collectors!  Does it make it better that we are sending them to the Red Areas?  Or that it is for a good cause?  It doesn’t matter.  It is the reality.  An inconvenient truth of its own.

The amazing thing is that the people have stepped up!  And the (fabulous) truth of the matter is that in the past few days we have raised over $30,000!

…and we had some donors that wanted to give so much we were left scratching our heads to even conceive of a legal way to accept that kind of money (OK, so I exaggerate a little)…

Now, I really don’t know how much that gets us.  That probably gets us pretty close to the finish line, and if it doesn’t demoralize the volunteers, we slide across it like the needle coming out of a junkie’s vein!  But it is all moot…

Hello everyone,

Today I had a communication from a member of Al Gore’s staff discouraging any efforts to put Al Gore’s name on any primary ballot. Accordingly, effective immediately, we should all cease our signature collection and related fund raising activities.  I will communicate tomorrow with the California Secretary of State that they should stop tallying any Nomination Papers. Further, I have communicated this information to the coordinators of the campaigns in Massachusetts, New York and New Hampshire, as well as with representatives of draftgore.com and algore.org.

I want you all to know how much I appreciate the experience that I have had working with and getting to know all of you. I am confident that we were on the cusp of doing something that had never been done before. There is no doubt in my mind that we would have succeeded. I believe that our efforts have not been in vain. I also believe that this does not represent a “Sherman statement” by the Gore camp. We know that Al Gore knows how to say “No.” For reasons he explained in the Rolling Stone interview, he continues to leave the door open on a future decision.

For those of us who are passionate about Al Gore, we can shift our time and money to the Alliance for Climate Protection. In his recent interviews, one of Gore’s consistent messages is that he is committed to changing the consciousness regarding climate protection before he can entertain political aspirations. Those of us who are in this for the long-run can choose to work with him to remove the obstacles and shift the consciousness. Al Gore was quoted as saying in his recent Rolling Stone interview: “It is a mistake to think of the climate crisis as one in a list of issues that will define our future. It is the issue.”

He also was quoted in that interview as directing the following to those of us who have placed our hopes in him: “Well thank you for felling that way about me. Please trust me to make good decisions about where I can do the most good, and don’t automatically assume that running for president again is the right thing for me to do. If you feel that way, and I decide for sure not to be a candidate again – well, sorry. But if I do get back involved in the political system at some point in the future – well, keep that energy stored up and let’s have a go at it then.”

Thanks a million!

Roy Gayhart

What does that mean?  I don’t know.  It isn’t exactly a Sherman statement.  But there it is.  It is the Inconvenient Truth for us Draft Gorers.  It takes a bit of the wind out of our sails…

Now, in the last few month, I have started to feel powerful.  Like I we had a voice that we were delivering to the establishment.  I don’t think that will go away.  We were on the cusp of making history.  We still have something to say…

The thing is, that is our ultimate Moment of (Inconvenient) Truth.  We are a movement without a clear cause.  For the moment…  You tell me…  What does it mean?  How do we best use our momentum?

http://www.climatepr…

For full disclose, I am involved in this effort, and as a matter of fact I first pointed out the relevant laws at the beginning of the year. 

Just in case you didn’t think there were enough Democratic Presidential Candidates, those that are voting in the California Democratic Primary on February 5th seem likely to have another choice: Al Gore. The effort to put Gore on the ballot is definitely picking up steam, and they are going to be all over the state next week as the period in which they are allowed to collect signatures begins. I was unavailable over the summer, but the idea was picked up by Roy Gayhart who built an amazing grassroots effort that is going to be successful and has started to get some attention.

Last week they put out their own press release, and this week Roy was interviewed for a Raw Story article.

The task itself is pretty easy, if it is well organized: collecting 500 signatures of registered Democrats in each of the 53 congressional districts.  From what I have seen of the organization they are easily going to have that.  They have set up district coordinators in each and every congressional district, and they continue to attract volunteers.

I always say that the Democratic Party has an embarrasement of riches in Presidential Candidates for 2008, but for these volunteers, Gore is still their first choice.  For them he represents something that is still not captured completely by any one of the other candidates.

But bottom line, what does it all mean?  They hope that this will help spark a Gore run.  But what if it doesn’t?

Well… the latest poll that I can find for California that includes Gore (June 2007) pegs his support at 19% (page 23; n=431, error=5%), behind Clinton (35%) and statistically tied with Obama (20%).  Asked who their second choice would be, it was split between Clinton (41%), Obama (25%), and Edwards (12%).

Nationally, there are a slew of polls in September, giving Gore support ranging from 8% to 16%.  And he isn’t running at this point, so come primary season, I expect that these numbers would hold, even if he doesn’t run.

And there are other states that are doing the same thing.  There is a long list of dates and deadlines in this dkos diary.  The first one with a deadline is Michigan, where Gore leads an August poll with 36%!  Their deadline is October 23rd.  They really don’t have an excuse, if they can’t get him on the ballot!

California has a 2 month window to collect the signatures they need by December 4th.  Looking at what they have on the ground, I don’t see how they could be anything but successful.  And that means that Gore will likely earn delegates to the Democratic National Convention from California, if nowhere else.  All he needs is 15% of the vote in California.

An interesting prospect for what should already be an exciting convention.  Of course, Gore retains the right to remove himself from the California ballot by writing to Debra Bowen, but he hasn’t done anything so Shermanesque yet.

And then the ultimate wild card could come from the Nobel Prize announcement next Friday.  Yup.  Next week should be interesting.

There has been much attention paid lately to the fact that the They Work For Us offenders list was scrubbed soon after its debut.  Many wonder how that bodes for a primary challenge against Ellen Tauscher.

For example, the East Bay Express, which takes what I consider an honest look at it, if a bit on the pessimistic side.  But then what do you expect from a segment called “City of Warts?” (emphasis mine):

On January 22, Democratic Party activist Steve Rosenthal announced the birth of Working For Us, a new Political Action Committee that would expose moderate Democrats to public shame, and even help run progressive primary challengers against the three “worst offenders.” …
The story got picked up by the Washington Post and Associated Press wire, Beltway tongues started wagging – and the blowback kicked in. …
Within 48 hours, Rosenthal had erased every name from his offenders’ list. …
What appeared in the first 24 hours to be a new, aggressive effort to replicate the libertarian Club for Growth muscle quickly fizzled into a tepid attempt at damage control. This is hardly an auspicious beginning for the Netroots campaign against Tauscher, and it shows that for all their online anguish, getting rid of the congresswoman will be a lot tougher than people think.

Personally, I think this is a good thing because it makes sense that this project have a populist component.  At the least it makes it seem less personal.  And that is as it should be (when you have a chance go to the link and nominate Ellen Tauscher or your other favorite).

But some seem to take this as an opportunity to cheer on Tauscher.  Join me on the flip…

Specifically, I am talking about Lisa Vorderbrueggen who writes for the Contra Costa Times.  Two weeks ago, she had erred by conflating Tauscher’s votes on Afganistan and Iraq.  Maybe you remember that?  She apologized, which is good, but let’s see what she has to say this time (emphasis mine):

[They Work For Us] will invest money and time in two or three 2008 primary races, Rosenthal said, although it hasn’t selected the races.

The Berkeley-based liberal blog Daily Kos and other Bay Area bloggers have taken a much stronger stand. They vow to find a progressive to challenge Tauscher, chairwoman of the moderate congressional New Democrat Coalition, in the 2008 primary.

They dislike Tauscher’s votes in favor of the Iraq war and a bankruptcy bill, her support of Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., and comments such as how Democrats must avoid going “off the left cliff.”

In District 10, however, political consultants and local elected and community leaders on both sides of the aisle are perplexed at the characterization of Tauscher as a mismatch.

To me this seems like a willful attempt to pull a fast one.  We should be talking about a primary challenge here, but there seems to be a continual effort to cast this as a general election battle.  Who do two of her star quotes come from? (emphasis mine):

Tauscher is a “perfect fit,” said Republican Antioch City Councilman Arne Simonsen. “The far left makes a lot of noise, but that doesn’t mean the silent majority doesn’t have a different feeling.”

Even Allan Hoffenblum, the GOP campaign manager for Bill Baker, who narrowly lost his seat to Tauscher in 1996, called her a strong match in the centrist district…

OK, do I really have to explain what is wrong here?  She is quoting Republicans about whether Tauscher represents the district!  I am all astontonished that they like her.  This is supposed to convince Democrats that a primary challenge is unneccessary?

To be fair, she does also quote one Democrat from Orinda, a conservative part of the district.  But that is supposed to be representative of the district, as a whole?  Hardly!  Yet she goes on to lecture us about District 10 politics and how we should all be focusing on helping McNerney win re-election to CA-11.

Gee.  I hope he doesn’t face a strong primary challenge.  Do you think that maybe Ellen Tauscher wants to support Steve Filson in the primary against him, again?  Maybe that is what she is saying?  Of course we are going to support McNerney in the general election.  He will need more help than whoever beats Ellen Tauscher in her primary, no matter who the Republican is that runs in CA-10.  Who knows.  Maybe by challenging Tauscher, we will have extra infrastructure in place that can be used to help McNerney?  But I digress…

Lisa quotes a lot of stats from the general election to try to prove her point.  She also compares CA-10 to neighboring CA-07 and CA-11 to try to prove her point.  She says that we are trying to turn Tauscher into Richard Pombo.

OK, where to begin?  First of all, we are talking about a PRIMARY, so the general election results don’t really mean much.  And I would never equate her with Richard Pombo but Steve Filson who Tauscher supported in the CA-11 primary against Jerry McNerney.  And they are telling us how much we need to support Jerry?  Forget it.  Let’s move on to the real numbers.  Those from the 2006 Democratic Primary

For comparison, Establishment candidate Steve Filson lost to Jerry McNerney 34.3% to 50.5% in CA-11.  George Miller and Ellen Tauscher ran unopposed in CA-07 and CA-10, respectively…

So Lisa was trying to characterize CA-07 as being much more liberal than CA-10, but I don’t see that here.  Angelides beat out Westly by a bit more in CA-07, but Speier, Bowen, Chiang, and Brown all did better in CA-10.  And all of these candidates did better in CA-10 than statewide.  Well, except Bustamante, and  that one is just screaming out as a joke about how much more intelligent these voters are!  These numbers pretty much speak for themselves.  Remember, this is all Democratic Primary results.  And as Lisa points out, CA-10 has a 12.5 point Democratic advantage in the general.

It is funny.  There has also been a lot of defenders of her pointing out where her record makes her a liberal, but then cry that if they target her then that means we need to target all moderates.  It doesn’t make sense.  They can’t have it both ways!  They point out how she is a defender of women’s rights, but I would expect that from anyone elected to the current CA-10.  The point is that we can (and will) do better.

The thing is, not only did she support the war in Iraq, and play an influential role in smoothing the way for the bankruptcy bill that gutted the rights of consumers recently, she consistantly stands up for the rights of corporate interests instead of her constituents.  She has also continually supported Republican tax “reform” legislation like the abolition of the Estate Tax (which, by the way, represents the most American of ideals, but that is a different diary).  And don’t forget her vote to impeachwith Republicans to investigate President Clinton.  But that was a vote of conscience, I suppose.

But that is why she needs to have a primary challenge.  Her constituents need to have a vote of their conscience, too.  If she represents her Democratic constituents much as Lisa claims they do, she won’t have anything to worry about.  It would have been nice if she could have found more than one that feels the same.

The time of the “New Democrats” is over.  Trying to out-Republican the Republicans has failed.  We need leaders and advocates.  Jerry McNerney has proved that.  That is what the basis of representation is supposed to be.  It is clear that Tauscher represents her donors, not those that elected her.  I am sorry to all the Republicans that feel represented by her.  Enjoy her while you have her.  Lisa says that we are full of ourselves because we helped McNerney win in a Republican District.  Maybe we are, but he did win, and CA-10 is a Democratic district.  Won’t that make it easier?  They make a show of supporting McNerney now, but never forget that they opposed him in the primary.  And we won, anyway.

There has been much attentionpaid lately to the fact that the They Work For Us offenders list was scrubbed soon after its debut.  Many wonder how that bodes for a primary challenge against Ellen Tauscher.

For example, the East Bay Express, which takes what I consider an honest look at it, if a bit on the pessimistic side.  But then what do you expect from a segment called “City of Warts?” (emphasis mine):

On January 22, Democratic Party activist Steve Rosenthal announced the birth of Working For Us, a new Political Action Committee that would expose moderate Democrats to public shame, and even help run progressive primary challengers against the three “worst offenders.” …
The story got picked up by the Washington Post and Associated Press wire, Beltway tongues started wagging – and the blowback kicked in. …
Within 48 hours, Rosenthal had erased every name from his offenders’ list. …
What appeared in the first 24 hours to be a new, aggressive effort to replicate the libertarian Club for Growth muscle quickly fizzled into a tepid attempt at damage control. This is hardly an auspicious beginning for the Netroots campaign against Tauscher, and it shows that for all their online anguish, getting rid of the congresswoman will be a lot tougher than people think.

Personally, I think this is a good thing because it makes sense that this project have a populist component.  At the least it makes it seem less personal.  And that is as it should be.

But some seem to take this as an opportunity to cheer on Tauscher.  Join me on the flip…

Specifically, I am talking about Lisa Vorderbrueggen who writes for the Contra Costa Times.  Two weeks ago, she had erred by conflating Tauscher’s votes on Afganistan and Iraq.  Maybe you remember that?  She apologized, which is good, but let’s see what she has to say this time (emphasis mine):

[They Work For Us] will invest money and time in two or three 2008 primary races, Rosenthal said, although it hasn’t selected the races.

The Berkeley-based liberal blog Daily Kos and other Bay Area bloggers have taken a much stronger stand. They vow to find a progressive to challenge Tauscher, chairwoman of the moderate congressional New Democrat Coalition, in the 2008 primary.

They dislike Tauscher’s votes in favor of the Iraq war and a bankruptcy bill, her support of Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., and comments such as how Democrats must avoid going “off the left cliff.”

In District 10, however, political consultants and local elected and community leaders on both sides of the aisle are perplexed at the characterization of Tauscher as a mismatch.

To me this seems like a willful attempt to pull a fast one.  We should be talking about a primary challenge here, but there seems to be a continual effort to cast this as a general election battle.  Who do two of her star quotes come from? (emphasis mine):

Tauscher is a “perfect fit,” said Republican Antioch City Councilman Arne Simonsen. “The far left makes a lot of noise, but that doesn’t mean the silent majority doesn’t have a different feeling.”

Even Allan Hoffenblum, the GOP campaign manager for Bill Baker, who narrowly lost his seat to Tauscher in 1996, called her a strong match in the centrist district…

OK, do I really have to explain what is wrong here?  She is quoting Republicans about whether Tauscher represents the district!  I am all astontonished that they like her.  This is supposed to convince Democrats that a primary challenge is unneccessary?

To be fair, she does also quote one Democrat from Orinda, a conservative part of the district.  But that is supposed to be representative of the district, as a whole?  Hardly!  Yet she goes on to lecture us about District 10 politics and how we should all be focusing on helping McNerney win re-election to CA-11.

Gee.  I hope he doesn’t face a strong primary challenge.  Do you think that maybe Ellen Tauscher wants to support Steve Filson in the primary against him, again?  Maybe that is what she is saying?  Of course we are going to support McNerney in the general election.  He will need more help than whoever beats Ellen Tauscher in her primary, no matter who the Republican is that runs in CA-10.  Who knows.  Maybe by challenging Tauscher, we will have extra infrastructure in place that can be used to help McNerney?  But I digress…

Lisa quotes a lot of stats from the general election to try to prove her point.  She also compares CA-10 to neighboring CA-07 and CA-11 to try to prove her point.  She says that we are trying to turn her into Richard Pombo.

OK, where to begin.  First of all, we are talking about a PRIMARY, so the general election results don’t really mean much.  And I would never equate her with Richard Pombo but Steve Filson who Tauscher supported in the CA-11 primary against Jerry McNerney.  And they are telling us how much we need to support Jerry?  Forget it.  Let’s move on to the real numbers.  Those from the 2006 Primary…

  CA-07 turnout CA-10 turnout CA-11 turnout State turnout
  24.4% 21.6% 14.7% 39.3%

  CA-07 CA-10 CA-11 Statewide
Governor Angelides 54.0% 52.1% 48.5% 48.0%
  Westly 37.9% 41.9% 45.3% 43.2%
  Becnel 2.9% 1.7% 1.8% 2.7%
Lt. Gov. Speier 46.4% 52.8% 52.8% 39.7%
  Garamendi 38.7% 37.1% 35.7% 42.6%
  Figueroa 14.9% 10.1% 11.5% 17.7%
Sec. State Bowen 60.6% 64.2% 59.7% 60.9%
  Ortiz 39.4% 35.8% 40.3% 39.1%
Controller Chiang 58.8% 61.0% 56.4% 53.3%
  Dunn 41.2% 39.0% 43.6% 46.7%
Att. Gen. Brown 73.5% 78.4% 75.4% 63.3%
  Delgadillo 26.5% 21.6% 24.6% 36.7%
Ins. Comm. Bustamante 71.5% 68.8% 64.5% 70.5%
  Kraft 28.5% 31.2% 35.5% 29.5%
US Senator Feinstein 89.3% 91.7% 91.7% 87.0%
  Fernald 7.0% 5.5% 5.1% 8.0%
  Church 3.7% 2.8% 3.2% 5.0%

There has been much discussion recently about money power vs. people power and its effect on politics.  As an example:

Rep. Ellen Tauscher (D-CA): Tauscher has been one of the most aggressive spokespeople for the Money Party, using her position to undercut major Democratic efforts to address core economic issues from a middle-class perspective. As an example, it was Tauscher who ran to newspapers desperately trying to let K Street know that she would be working to undermine Democrats’ efforts to reform our trade policy. More recently, she told the New York Times that Democrats would be engaging in a “kabuki dance” with their own base voters – implying that there would be moves for show, but that pay-to-play business as usual in Washington will continue in the new Congress.

There are plenty of other examples of what the Money Party‘s priorities mean for everyday people, but I wanted to share one that effects me on a much more personal and local level and use that to make a pitch for public financing of campains, at least at the local level.

How low am I going?

I am talking about going all the way down to my school school board.  I have one child in the local school system, and one that will be entering it in the coming years.

The district is the West Contra Costa Unified School District and you would think that when you go that low, you would be free from the corrupting influence of Money Party politics.  In this case, you would be wrong:

Unprecedented fundraising in the race for the West Contra Costa Unified School District board is raising some eyebrows.

Incumbent Charles Ramsey and district Bond Oversight Committee member Madeline Kronenberg — among eight candidates for three board seats in the Nov. 7 election — have received more than $200,000 in combined campaign contributions. That’s more than 10 times the combined amount the remaining six candidates received from Jan. 1 to Sept. 30, according to county campaign-disclosure statements…

But wait, it gets worse, yet:

Records show that much of the money Kronenberg has received is from contractors and subcontractors working with the district. It includes $20,000 in donations from the Seville Group, a construction management company that has a long-term contract with the district.

Kronenberg also accepted $5,000 from Interactive Resources, $3,000 from Arthur Tam and Associates and $10,000 from Wallace Boyd Gordon, an architect for Deems Lewis McKinley Architects.

All the firms have worked with or are actively working with the district on construction projects.

Yikes!  Her money is coming from the construction industry at a time when the district is spending a mountain of beans on reconstruction of 18 elementary, three middle and two high schools.  And… she was a member of the Bond Oversight Committee.  Conflict of Interests, anyone?  Her fig leaf:

“There isn’t any vendor choices made on the Oversight Committee. We don’t do that,” Kronenberg said. “I’m proud of the fundraising I’ve done and proud of what I’ve been able to raise. I think the reason I’ve been successful in raising the money is because I’ve established a presence in the community.”

The election is over, so why am I bringing this up?  Because I wanted to raise the flag that this is where it all starts.  This is where higher level candidates come from.  How can we expect to recruit good candidates for higher offices, if they can’t get a good start?

California’s Prop 89 failed in November, but I think that public financing of campaigns is an important part of the solution.  Maybe we have to start with these down ticket non-partisan races.  Public financing of campaigns is seen as a waste of taxpayer money, but I don’t think there are many more programs that the public could benefit more from:  allowing voters to choose based on the ideas of the candidates rather than having so much be influenced on how much a candidate can raise.

Plus, this race really isn’t quite over (top 3 are elected):

MADELINE KRONENBERG  20,632  18.91%
  AUDREY MILES  20,045   18.37%
  CHARLES RAMSEY  17,009  15.59%
  ANTONIO MEDRANO  16,943  15.53%
  …

Note that Kronenberg was the biggest vote winner.  Money wins.  Well, sort of.  Only 66 votes keep Antonio Medrano from knocking out Charles Ramsey.  Let’s take a closer look at that.

several people have questioned what Ramsey intends to do with $132,600 — the largest amount ever raised for a West Contra Costa district board race…

Ramsey said he likely will spend $80,000 to $90,000 on mailings and probably will give the rest to charity…

Ramsey said rumors that he will use leftover money to run for state Assembly are unfounded and legally impossible because there are campaign-contribution limits for statewide races and he cannot roll his money over.

He got most of that money from Unions across the state.  Raising so much money from outside the district has raised its own questions about how school board contributions should be regulated.

He did spend a lot of that money on flyers.  I can tell you we got some nice shiny glossy flyers day after day.  I assume that he is running for the 14th Assembly District seat, and he was using the flyers to raise his profile and name recognition.  The currest representative for AD-14, Loni Hancock, will be termed out in 2008.  He has run for that race before.  My favorite part:

“Seven years ago I made a mistake,” Ramsey said as he admitted to soliciting sex from an undercover female cop posing as a prostitute. “I hurt my wife and family. The perception I had of women was not a good one.”

Although Ramsey said he has since been working toward changing that perception and giving back to the community, the surprise admission did not sit well with sophomore Denise May.

“I respect him for admitting he made a mistake, but it’s going to be imprinted in my mind throughout the campaign,” May said.

May added that the incident has caused her to question Ramsey’s morals because “anyone who has respect for women would never do that,” she said.

OK, maybe bringing up that quote is a little low (even for this diary), but this in not the person I want to be part of taking responsibility for the education of my little girls.

Medrano, who was endorsed by the Richmond Teachers and two current Board Members has until Friday to decide if he wants to ask for a recount.  He has to weigh the benefits to the costs.  Since voters were selecting 3 candidates, 67 ballots will have to be found that voted for him and not Ramsey, out of a little over 100,000 cast.

We shall see…

Following up on this great diary about becoming a delegate from an Assembly District, I just wanted to do one more quick diary about the County Central Committee option.

I didn’t want to put it on the front page, because there is more important information that is going on there, and I think this works just fine in the Diaries section, especially since it is more of a case study of the County I belong to and an extrapolation from there (not to mention the third diary on the topic)…

As mentioned before, the Delegates are broken up as:

Approx. 2826 members
– 960 elected by Assembly Districts
– 933 elected by County Central Committees
– 933 for electeds/nominees and their appointees, State Party officers, and DNC members

If you volunteered extensively for a campaign, you will probably know better than anyone else if you have a chance of getting appointed as part of the “electeds/nominees” delegation.

willy mugobeer‘s diary covered the Assembly districts well.

This is about the County Central Committee delegates.  The bylaws of the CDP specify that:

Each County Central Committee of the Party shall elect, from its own members as defined by its by-laws*, representatives… as follows: four members as base representation, plus one member for each 10,000 registered Democrats or fraction thereof.

Furthermore

Elections shall be held by January 31 following the regular general statewide election…

(More on this soon, but start working towards getting on the State Central Cmte. Also, check out DFA’s Powerpoint presentation available here. – promoted by SFBrianCL)

Well, the 2006 election is over, but there is little time for us to sit on our laurels.  We accomplished a lot, and we need to continue the momentum.  I think we should go to the 2007 California Democratic Party Convention as delegates.

(For those that watch the video linked above, about 2/3 of the way through, the camera swings around and for a little bit is pointing right at me -goofy guy with green shirt, my 15min of fame- with a banner above me that reads “I am the margin of victory.”  That represents what we all are.  WHO we are.  Every bit of ourselves that we put into it makes a difference.)

The convention is being held Friday to Sunday, April 27 to 29 in San Diego, CA.

This is the next part of becoming involved.  We need to increase the membership of the Progressive Caucus of the California Democratic Party:

-We believe that all Citizens are entitled to equal rights and equal treatment under the law, and that no one shall be denied these rights because of gender, race, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, or religion.
-We believe in the separation of Church and State.
-We believe in economic fairness and the right of every American to a job that pays a living wage.
-We believe that pre-emptive war is wrong and that this country should seek solutions to international threats through diplomatic channels and the United Nations.
-We believe that every Citizen is entitled to quality health care and that single payer universal health insurance is a right, not a privilege.
-We believe that the environment is a trust and that we are responsible for preserving it for future generations.
-We believe in the public school system and that every child should have an opportunity for free, quality education in a safe environment.
-We believe that the death penalty is wrong.
-We believe, above all, in the Constitution of the United States and in the right of the People to self-government.

OK, OK, I know you are all down for that.  How do we do it, you ask?  Well this is how it is set up:

CDP – Democratic State Central Committee

Approx. 2826 members
– 960 elected by Assembly Districts
– 933 elected by County Central Committees
– 933 for electeds/nominees and their appointees, State Party officers, and DNC members

What we should be interested in is the 1893 members that are elected at the Assembly District and County Central Committee level.

That is us

If we are registered to vote as a Democrat: Each of us belong to a State Assembly District.  Each of us are members of a County.

And the elections are coming up.  Here is what you need to do:

If you don’t know which assembly district you are in, you can probably figure it out using this map or playing with the maps here.

Once you know, take that information here and get in contact with your Assembly District Committee Chair.  Let them know that you are interested in becoming a delegate.  Let them know the contributions you have made to the party.

The Assembly District elections are being held in early January, so now is the time to start this.

If you want to try to do it on the County side, that is just as good, but get in contact with your County Committee right away.  The election will probably be in December.  But, the same thing goes.  Let them know you are interested, and what you have done.

Maybe you can try one and then the other, if you can’t get in the first try.

Let me tell you how it is working in my County, Contra Costa County.  Contra Costa County has parts of 3 Assembly Districts in it.  The county is choosing its delegates at the next meeting, December 21.  We have 28 slots to fill.  I can tell you right now, we probably will not be able to fill all of those slots.

Anybody out there live in Contra Costa County?

In addition, each of the 3 Districts with which Contra Costa County overlaps will be sending their own delegates.

The 14th Assembly District (in which I live) will be electing 14 delegates on (last I heard) January 13.  I am not as familiar with the goings on there, but I assume there are plenty of volunteers for those slots.  That district includes Berkeley, which is in Alameda County.

So there it is in a nutshell.  Who is going to San Diego in April?  Anything to add?  Did I forget to address something?

I posted this earlier at dkos, and then realized I should also post it here.  It isn’t much of a diary, but enjoy!
Audio of the first 30 minutes:

I just got back from a Democratic Victory Press Conference in Oakland, CA.  Those in attendance (no particular order):

Jerry McNerney
Debra Bowen
John Garamendi
Ron Dellums
Jerry Brown
John Chiang
Art Torres
Loads more on down the list.

“When you are in the Majority, you get to cut the pie a little different.”
-Ron Dellums

I don’t remember the exact quote, but you have the feel.  My impressions on the flip…

First of all…

I got to shake Jerry’s hand!  (McNerney, not Brown)  yay!  And I got to have a nice chat with Debra.  She is fabulous and a VERY real person.  We haven’t seen the last of her!

There was a lot of energy.  A press conference just concluded at the Oakland CDP headquarters.  Present were just about every Democratic Statewide and local candidate you could think of.  And all the California Democratic Party staff and volunteers.

Everyone was really excited about “keeping 7 of the 9 constitutional offices” of California within Democratic control. 

I was most impressed with the speach that Ron Dellums gave.  He has just been elected as Mayor of Oakland, but he was the Representative to Congress for the Berkeley/Oakland area for more than 25 years, elected in 1970 (I think) as a black anti-Vietnam War activist with a ‘fro.

Well, I have to say: he still has it (the fire and energy, not the big ‘fro).  He is a very powerful and inspirational speaker.

He and John Garamendi listed off the Senators and Congressmen that were going to be heading the various committees.  I didn’t have anything to take notes with.  But I am sure that there are some that are reading this that can list them out in the comments.

But it is an amazing thing to consider.  John Conyers on Judicial.  Barney Frank on Financial Services.  You get the idea…

But we have to also realize that this is just a new beginning.

John Garamendi talked about coming back to this country in the late 60s after RFK was shot.  How he came back to a different country than the one he knew.  That there was a lot of unrest in the streets and a lot of violence, but that now he sees us starting to achieve a dream that was just starting to be concieved at that time.

Debra Bowen talked (of course) about taking a look INSIDE those black boxes of Diebold.  Of making sure that the process is transparent.  These are my words, but voting should be something that we, the people, own collectively.  Just as the air we breathe.  We expect government to protect our air, and we should expect it to protect our votes as well.  It shouldn’t be turned over to for-profit companies with proprietary software.  I am sure she thinks about it in the same way.

So, those are the highlights.

Did I mention that I got to shake Jerry McNerney’s hand?  He was great, too.  He said is going to focus on renewable energy and aleviating our dependance of oil.  He knows he and Pelosi have a lot of work to do, and he is ready for it!

I should add that McNerney was definitlely the star of the show.  The media was tripping over itself to film his every move and word!

(Unfortunately, the two-party system dominates. A Green pulling votes could hand the election to a scary conservative, such as McClintock. – promoted by SFBrianCL)

So, we are holding a press conference tomorrow morning with Rep. Barbara Lee (D, CA-09).  We are going to highlight the importance of supporting the Democrat in a close race where a Green is running.

Especially when that Democrat has a Progressive message and agenda, such as John Garamendi and Debra Bowen.

This is late notice, but I wanted to get the message out.  We would like there to be as big a show of support as we can get.  Unfortunately, it is being held during business hours, so that will be a challenge.  It is being held at 9:30 tomorrow morning, but if you can make it please try and be there at 9:00AM to help set up.

The location is in Richmond, CA at 3431 D Macdonald Ave (at 35th).  This is our West Contra Costa County UDC campaign HQ.

Press release on the flip…

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT:  Bonnie Jean von Krogh
November 1, 2006
(510) 594-0224 (W); 415-336-6176 (C)

BARBARA LEE & IRMA ANDERSON CALL ON GAYLE MCLAUGHLIN TO SUPPORT STATE DEMOCRATIC TICKET Green Party support could cost Democrats statewide offices

(Richmond, CA) – Congresswoman Barbara Lee is joining with Mayor Irma Anderson to call on Richmond Mayoral candidate and Green Party member Gayle McLaughlin to publicly announce her support for the Democratic candidates for statewide office. McLaughlin has endorsed against Democratic statewide candidates.

“Four races in California are close enough that progressive support for Greens over Democrats could make Richmond the Florida of the 2006 election,” said Congresswoman Barbara Lee.

Polling shows that four statewide races could be within the margin of error.  All four races have a Green Party candidate.
.    Lieutenant Governor between Democrat John Garamendi and Republican Tom McClintock
.    Secretary of State between Democrat Debra Bowen and Republican Bruce McPherson
.    Controller between Democrat John Chiang and Republican Tony Strickland
.    Insurance Commissioner between Democrat Cruz Bustamante and Republican Steve Poizner

PRESS CONFERENCE & PHOTO OP
WHAT: Barbara Lee, Irma Anderson & Contra Costa County Democratic Party leaders call on Gayle McLaughlin to endorse Democrats for statewide office
WHEN: Thursday, November 2nd, 9:30 a.m.
WHERE: West County Democrat/Irma Anderson Headquarters

3431 D Macdonald Avenue (at 35th)
WHO: Congresswoman Barbara Lee, Mayor Irma Anderson, Democratic Party Executive Boardmember Gabriel Baty, and Community Advocates