From today’s Beyond Chron.

San Francisco Supervisor Chris Daly has filed to run for Regional Director of the California Democratic Party – challenging long-time incumbent August Longo.  In an e-mail sent to State Party delegates (who will pick the Regional Director on April 25th at the annual Convention in Sacramento), Daly stressed his credentials as a “community organizer,” and the need to build on the grass-roots success of Barack Obama.  But Daly’s decision to run also comes after Longo cast the lone dissenting vote (albeit through a proxy) at a S.F. Democratic Central Committee meeting against an immigrant rights resolution.  Following that vote at the DCCC meeting, Daly objected to a motion endorsing Longo for re-election – but at the time, his colleagues overruled him 15-4.  Longo now claims he would have voted differently on the resolution if present, but Daly says he’s not running against Longo’s record.  The job of Regional Director, said Daly, can be transformed to engage the grassroots and push for progressive change within the Party.  Delegates from San Francisco and San Mateo Counties will get to vote at the Convention, and the outcome is very much in doubt.

What is a Regional Director?

The California Democratic Party has 21 Regional Directors – elected every two years by delegates from their respective regions.  According to the party by-laws, Regional Directors shall “assist the statewide officers [i.e., Party Chair, Vice-Chair, etc.] in the maintenance and development of the Party organization within their respective regions. They are responsible for developing, assisting, and coordinating the County Central Committees, Clubs & other Democratic organizations within their region.”  In practice, the Regional Director serves as a liaison between local Democrats and the State Party.

“I stand by my record,” said August Longo – who has served as Regional Director for San Francisco and San Mateo Counties for the past eight years.  “I work very closely with delegates, while Chris [Daly] hasn’t been a part of the State Party.  I welcome his participation, but I think I’ve done a really good job.”  A few veteran delegates are backing him up. “I support August Longo because he’s been very efficient about holding meetings,” said Jane Morrison.  “When I was Chair of the San Francisco DCCC,” added Scott Wiener, “there were a lot of ‘nuts and bolts’ issues with the State Party where August was very helpful.”

But Daly says a Regional Director could do a lot more.  “August is doing the minimum of what the job requires,” he said.  “I had a good conversation with John Burton [who is likely to become the next Chair] about what regional directors can do, and it’s really what you make of it. We have to figure out how to better engage the State Party.  Every Democrat is talking about change, but who in the State Party is engaging the netroots, who is engaging issue-based activists, service providers and folks organizing around liberation struggles to make the Democratic Party more relevant?  Regional Director is not a high profile position, but we can create models of organizing that work and replicate.”

It’s a message that resonates with progressive San Francisco delegates. “I support Chris Daly because he’s an organizer, and could really bring a whole new dimension to the job,” said Robert Haaland.  “It would make me more excited to be involved with the California Democratic Party.”  DCCC Chair Aaron Peskin added that in the aftermath of the Obama victory, and with a new generation of Democratic activists coming of age, “it’s time to change a lot of old blood in the State Party structure.  I’m with Chris Daly.”

But not every San Franciscan of Daly’s ideological bent is on board.  John Burton told me he respects Daly’s decision to run, but committed his support to Longo “a long time ago.”  When Burton was in the State Senate, August Longo was his proxy on the DCCC.  “I love Chris Daly,” said DCCC member Hene Kelly, “but I just don’t think this is a job he would want to do … if he understood what it is.  It’s a lot of organizing, it’s a lot of getting people to work together, and it’s a lot of getting information out to the region.  Regional Director is really a ‘nuts and bolts’ job, and that’s what August has done.  We need Chris in a different position to influence policy in the state Party.  I want Chris Daly on the Resolutions Committee.”

Concerns About Longo’s Voting Record

As Regional Director of the State Party, August Longo has a seat on the San Francisco DCCC.  This by-law change was added in July 2005 to allow him to serve on the DCCC, and some progressives have argued it was pushed by moderates to manipulate endorsement votes in local elections.  But the roll call vote proves it was a move supported by most DCCC members (including many progressives), and it is quite customary for most county Central Committees to give their state Regional Directors a seat.

Nevertheless, it’s also true that Longo’s voting record on the DCCC has been very moderate – which will give some progressives ample reasons to support Daly.  In February 2007, Longo was the only member (along with the proxies for Dianne Feinstein and Nancy Pelosi) not to support a Resolution asking Congress to de-fund the Iraq War.  In the very high-stakes July 2008 race for Chair, Longo voted for Scott Wiener over Aaron Peskin – and there were allegations of Mayor Gavin Newsom influencing his vote. On the endorsement votes for candidates and propositions, Longo did not side with progressives.

At the March 25th DCCC meeting, Longo was in the hospital – but had instructed his proxy to vote “no” on a Resolution demanding that Mayor Gavin Newsom “redirect law enforcement efforts away from criminalizing the immigrant community.”  Public comment on the issue was very emotional, and Longo ended up being the only “no” vote.  This prompted Chris Daly to oppose a motion later on in the meeting that the DCCC endorse Longo for re-election as Regional Director.  Some members felt it unfair to presume Longo would still have voted that way if present, but four colleagues voted to publicly oppose the motion endorsing Longo – and another four members abstained.  Daly has since filed to run against Longo.

“I had to make a decision about the Immigration Resolution before the meeting,” said Longo, “and it’s hard to send your vote in.  I am the son of immigrants, and I understand immigration issues.  For Chris to attack me on this is unfair.”  When asked if he would have voted differently on the Resolution if he had been there to hear the public testimony, Longo said “yes.”

Some DCCC members, however, expressed concern that it took so long – almost three weeks – for Longo to repudiate his proxy vote.  They compare it with what happened at the DCCC’s February meeting, when Scott Wiener was out of town – and his proxy cast what turned out to be a controversial vote.  Within less than 24 hours, Wiener sent out an e-mail apologizing for the mistake – and said it did not reflect his personal position.

Playing Well With Others

Despite concerns that progressives may have with Longo’s voting record on endorsements, his supporters argue that he takes his job as Regional Director seriously – and follows the Party line once a decision has been made.  “August is a Party worker,” said Hene Kelly.  “After we endorse progressive candidates or ballot measures, he has worked to help us win.”

This may end up presenting quite a contrast with Chris Daly – who in June 2008 printed a highly deceptive campaign door-hanger that suggested a Bay Guardian endorsement of Carole Migden (whille the paper had endorsed Mark Leno.)  The Guardian editors were unhappy, and felt that their good name was being used.  Will delegates be willing to elect a Regional Director with such a track record, given that a big part of the job involves disseminating the State Party’s position at the local level?

Hogging the Spotlight?

Another criticism of Daly running for Regional Director is a familiar one we’ve heard before: he’s already on the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, the Democratic County Central Committee, and was an Obama delegate to the Democratic National Convention.  “I don’t understand why he would want to do this,” said Scott Wiener.  “Why does he need to have yet another elected position?  I read his e-mail about wanting to do more grassroots organizing in the State Party, and he can already do that work with his position on the DCCC.”

Daly doesn’t buy that critique.  “I’ll be termed out of the Board of Supervisors next year,” he said, “and I’m interested in building progressive politics for the long term.”  He ran for Obama delegate, because at the time there was legitimate concern that there would be a floor fight in Denver.  He ran for the DCCC, because “we had a job we had to do” to get progressives elected locally – which was very successful.  “I’m using my political capital to build progressive politics in the Democratic Party,” said Daly.  “If the main criticism is that I’m hogging seats, I must be doing a good job.”

If Daly gets elected Regional Director, he has promised to resign from the DCCC.  Under that scenario, DCCC Chair Aaron Peskin would appoint a replacement –  which would hopefully be a young activist who is trying to get more involved.

Who Gets to Vote for Regional Director?

If just the San Francisco DCCC got to pick the Regional Director, Daly would probably win – based on the political bent of that body.  But other people who will have a vote in this election include (a) the 36 State Party delegates from the 12th, 13th and 19th Assembly Districts who were elected in January at caucus meetings, (b) other delegates from those districts appointed by various officeholders, (c) state and federal elected officials who represent the Region, and (d) members of the San Mateo DCCC who live in the 19th Assembly District.

Longo says his “proudest accomplishment” as Regional Director over the past eight years was helping the San Mateo County Committee become financially self-sufficient – which implies that he has strong ties there.  Daly admitted that he only just started reaching out to the San Mateo delegates, with not much time before the Convention. Assemblyman Tom Ammiano wasn’t even aware that Daly had filed to run when I called him, and proxies for State Senators Leland Yee and Mark Leno voted to endorse Longo when the issue came up at the San Francisco DCCC.  At this point, it appears to be an uphill fight for Daly – although it’s certainly winnable.

The state Democratic Convention will be in Sacramento April 24-26.  According to the agenda, Regional Directors will be chosen on Saturday afternoon.  It’s safe to say that the Region 4 meeting will be by far the most interesting.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Paul Hogarth was appointed by Assemblyman Tom Ammiano to be a State Party delegate for the 13th A.D., which means he will have a vote in this race.

(Registration is an important feature as we look for opportunities to get to 2/3. Thanks for organizing all this data! – promoted by Brian Leubitz)

The Secretary of State has just published new voter registration statistics.  Compared to the February 10 update, there were 115,300 fewer voters in California on March 20–46,445 fewer Democrats, 41,538 fewer Republicans and 23,295 fewer decline-to-states.  Democrats now make up 0.03 percent more of the electorate than they did in February (now 44.55%), while Republicans make up 0.03 percent less (now 31.10%) and Decline to States have remained virtually unchanged (at 19.99%).

At the county level, Republicans have lost ground to Democrats in 36 counties, and gained on Democrats in 21.  One county, Napa, has remained perfectly unchanged.  The Republican registration advantage in Orange County, for example, has shrunk from 12.21 percent in February to 11.84 percent now.  Similar leftward shifts (percentage-wise) are occurring in San Mateo, Alpine, Yolo, Sierra, Tuolumne, San Bernardino, San Francisco and Imperial counties.  The only comparable Republican gains are in Kings and Madera counties.  If the Orange County rate of Democratic relative growth continues (it most certainly won’t), Democrats will outnumber Republicans in Orange county by 2012.

In the State Senate, there are 14 districts where the incumbent party has been losing its relative share of voters since February–nine currently held by Republicans (SD-01, SD-12, SD-14, SD-15, SD-17, SD-18, SD-29, SD-33, SD-35) and five by Democrats (SD-05, SD-16, SD-25, SD-26, SD-39).  Only SD-12, SD-15 and SD-17 are competitive.  All three of those are held by Republicans and all three already have Democratic registration majorities.  SD-12 is the only one of these seats that is up in 2010 and is almost certainly the only 2010 Senate race that will be even close to competitive (Democrats have a 14.04 percent registration edge).  SD-04 is theoretically possible to flip if we get a very, very strong Democrat (Republicans have an 11.05 percent registration advantage); but we’d probably wind up with a Democrat like Bob Nelson or Evan Bayh who’d vote against the budget anyway.  Our best chance at 2/3 anytime soon is for Maldo or Strickland to quit.

Assembly details over the flip….

In the Assembly, there are 50 districts where the incumbent party is losing ground.  Among potentially competitive districts, there are nine such districts, all of which are currently held by Republicans: AD-03, AD-05, AD-25, AD-26, AD-33, AD-36, AD-37, AD-38, and AD-63.

POTENTIALLY COMPETITIVE ASSEMBLY SEATS

An * signifies a term-limited incumbent.

(Chris Finnie is a candidate for chair of the California Democratic Party, everyone. – promoted by David Dayen)

If you look at the Greek derivation of the word democracy, it means rule by the people. But, as I’ve travelled around the state running for state party chair, I frequently find myself speaking with incumbents who are running for other statewide offices. And what I’ve heard them say has little to do with democracy.

They repeatedly say in response to questions, “That’s up to the chair” or “The chair decides that” and “Only the chair has that authority.” It sounds little like any definition of democracy.

I know some people have a lot of input. Those are primarily Democratic elected officials, union leaders, and big-money donors. I suspect they are the people the party coordinates with for their supposedly “coordinated” campaigns. Certainly it is not the elected county or regional party leaders-except, perhaps, in several of the largest counties. But, in most of the counties I’ve visited, they say the party never talks to them. What really makes them angry though is that the party never listens to them. As a member of the state central committee and a state standing committee, I know that feeling all too well.

I do not believe this is a strategy for long-term success and growth. It is not a way to bring in new volunteers and new voters. And we are not doing enough to make the party relevant to a new generation of voters.

It is not an impossible task. A young man on an airport bus told me a few days ago that he believes politics will be more relevant to people as they see the disastrous effects of political decisions on their daily lives.

We need to show people that they can make an impact on these important decisions. That the party is a place where they can effect meaningful change.

One way to do that is to put the demos (people) back in Democratic. To include more people in the decision-making process of the party. To listen more to local experts. To coordinate more broadly. To make participation more meaningful and more rewarding.

The California Democratic Party is made up of wonderful, energetic, idealistic, talented people who want to make a difference. Together, we are better than the party we have. Together, we can build the party we deserve.

It’s been distressing to see the race for CDP chair turn from an election into a coronation, with John Burton lining up institutional support, muscling out the grassroots and forcing his competition to the sidelines.  Coming off an historic Presidential election, with the demographics squarely on the side of Democrats and a new generation of activists who have boundless ideas to bring a different organizing philosophy to California, the right chairman of the Party could really leverage the energy and activity into something special, to lay the groundwork for a re-imagining of the political structure.  Sadly, the best can be said of Burton is that he’s an old workhorse, but there are troubling signs that he is unaware of the changes in modern campaiging, unconcerned with reforming the broken institutions both inside and outside the party, and unable to use the new energy and excitement to any decent ends.  It appears that the frenetic organizing outside the party structure may be the only hope for progressives in the near term.

But it could be even worse than that.  The new site Burton Watch offers a substantive critique of the former State Senator, with information that every delegate and voting member of the Party ought to know before turning over the reins to this guy.  The initial post surveys how Democrats could lose California under this version of leadership:

Because the public instinctively knows that when power and money compete with the public interest, we all suffer. If you’ve ever registered voters or walked precincts for a candidate, you’ve undoubtedly been greeted with this response: “I’m not going to vote because it doesn’t matter. All politicians are the same.” And as the cynicism grows, voter turnout declines and the Decline To State registration escalates — now approximately 20% of all Californians are registered DTS. So how do we combat the innate distrust that drives a large segment of our population to disengage from political parties and even voting? Well, Obama showed us a part of the solution […]

When previously disenfranchised voters, minorities, and the young are all flocking to the Democratic Party because we represent a new way, a vision of hope and change, why on earth would we want to take a giant step backwards to the bad old days? And yet that’s exactly what Democrats in California are poised to do this April. The California Democratic Party, instead of rising to meet the challenges of a new millennium with openness and inclusion, is set to reach back to one of the oldest and most entrenched political machines in California history for its leadership.

Enter John Burton, California’s much older version of Rod Blagojevich. There are so many reasons why John Burton is unfit for the role of Party Chair in California, that I’ll be doing a series of posts, each one dedicated to a disqualifying aspect of his background. All of the material I’ll be using has been obtained through basic use of the google, and the state’s Republicans could easily find and use it against California Democrats. And trust me, they will.

At the end of this series, I think you’ll agree that John Burton is the wrong person to lead the California Democratic Party in 2009.

The next installment recounts perhaps the most infamous episode in Burton’s past – the very public sexual harassment lawsuit brought by a former staffer, with excerpts from the complaint filed by Kathleen Driscoll in San Francisco Superior Court:

During DRISCOLL’S employment, BURTON engaged in hostile, demeaning and sexually abusive conduct such that DRISCOLL’S working conditions were significantly altered. His conduct over the past year easily rises to the level of severe or pervasive conduct for a hostile work environment sexual harassment claim both in California and under federal law. The harassing acts started in approximately September 2006. They consisted of numerous events, which took place throughout DRISCOLL’S employment, including but not limited to:

Asking DRISCOLL over the phone, “What are you wearing?” on approximately 10 occasions;

On one occasion, DRISCOLL sent a temporary employee to deliver paperwork to BURTON. BURTON ordered DRISCOLL to never send someone on her behalf again by berating her, “When you drop stuff off, stop in will ya? I mean I’m not getting laid under the fuckin’ table.”

Singling DRISCOLL out for exorbitant demands and attention, included but not limited to excessive demands for immediate and frequent meetings to go over routine matters, including on weekends after the work week was over in contrast to her co-workers;

There’s more at the link, and it’s pretty graphic.  It goes without saying that women make up an extremely large bloc of the Democratic base.

I don’t know what more Burton Watch will trot out, but here are some facts: Californians have little connection to their state government other than knowing that they don’t like it.  They hear things like how politicians are living high off campaign donations and it’s both alienating and corrosive.  The rules are already rigged in favor of a conservative wipeout of government and the last thing Democrats need as they seek to make structural changes is the spectre of an old-school pol with a lot of skeletons hanging over their collective heads.  John Burton has the potential to take the state backwards and it’s a chance that delegates should think long and hard about.