Randy Shaw wrote the following article for today’s Beyond Chron.

The absence of a competitive mayor’s race in San Francisco has left some with pent-up energies demanding an outlet. This became clear with the imbroglio at the Milk Club last week, as passions reached a boiling point over a June 2008 State Senate that is actually three elections away. Why such a furor around this race, and what is it really about? Is the race a proxy fight between pro and anti-Newsom camps, a fight for the “soul” of the gay, lesbian and transgender community, and/or a litmus test on the morality/value of challenging incumbent Democrats? Is it a question of which candidate is more aligned with corporate San Francisco, and/or the fabled Brown-Burton political machine? The Leno-Migden struggle has been defined as all of these things, but the contest should really only be about one issue – which candidate will more effectively serve the district.

Last week’s hijinks at the Harvey Milk LGBT Democratic Club made for great political theater. I don’t think the Club has had such a fight over membership “stacking” since the 1987 Mayor’s race, when Carole Migden and Harry Britt endorsed Mayor Feinstein-backed Jack Molinari -while most progressive gays and lesbians supported Art Agnos.

Those were the days when Club endorsements really meant something. And given the high stakes of the heated battles in 1987, and to a lesser extent in the 1995 Mayor’s race, was not surprising.

But a State Senate race?  I am very involved in state legislation, and would bet that many of those who attended the Milk Club fracas have never been in a State Senator’s or Assemblyperson’s office trying to secure a vote.

With most San Francisco activists paying little attention to Sacramento politics, why the uproar over the Migden-Leno race?  I’ve read many reasons.

Migden vs. Leno=Progressives vs. Newsom:

One is that Migden-Leno gives progressives the opportunity to send a message against Mayor Newsom by defeating his alleged proxy, Mark Leno. This has been the rallying cry of Supervisor Chris Daly, who makes no secret of his strong dislike for San Francisco’s mayor.

Daly’s argument allows activists still smarting over the lack of a serious progressive challenger to Newsom to channel their disappointment into working to defeat Leno. The only problem with this line of reasoning is some stubborn facts.

For example, Newsom has not even endorsed Leno, and has no plans to do so. And Leno has among the most progressive voting records in the entire State Legislature.

Try as he might, Daly cannot turn Mark Leno into Newsom’s hand-picked former District 6 candidate, Rob Black. And there are many people who strongly back both Migden and Newsom.

A Battle for the “Soul” of the Community:

Migden backers emphasize her leadership in the Milk Club during the 1980’s, and imply that she, far more than Mark Leno, represents the activist legacy of the gay and lesbian civil rights movement. And there is no question that Migden has activist roots that Leno does not have, and a powerful grassroots history.

But Mark Leno’s historic State Legislative leadership on marriage equality also connected him to a grassroots base, and he helped mobilize this base. Meanwhile, the Carole Migden of the 1980’s and the Carole Migden of 2007 are quite different in their relationship to the grassroots.

Many have commented how infrequently Migden was seen in the community in recent years until Leno announced his candidacy; now she is everywhere.

Incumbent Democrats Should Not Be Challenged:

Migden backers argue that Leno’s candidacy is destructive because it diverts financial and activist resources away from battling Republicans. In other words, Democrats should not challenge incumbent Democrats, particularly when the incumbent votes progressively on core issues.

What’s interesting about this argument is that it coincides with the longtime defense of the fabled Brown-Burton machine. The machine avoided nasty fights among Democrats by deciding who would run in certain races, and where resources would go in others.

Ironically, one of the biggest beneficiaries of a San Francisco Democratic Party political machine long scorned by the Bay Guardian and other progressives has been Carole Migden. Since leaving the Board of Supervisors in 1996, Migden has won a string of uncontested races for the Assembly, State Board of Equalization, and the State Senate.

Maybe this is a good thing. Money might have gone into progressive causes that would otherwise have been donated to Migden’s contested elections.

But maybe always running unopposed can make one lackadaisical about delivering for one’s constituency. And a political machine that serves as a traffic cop for aspiring candidates can harm the democratic process, creating the impression that political leadership is decided in the backrooms, rather than by the people in an open process.

Since the June 2008 State Senate primary does not coincide with partisan races, the argument that Leno is diverting resources from fighting the real enemy falls flat. And opposition to the biggest threat on that ballot—a statewide initiative to eliminate rent control in California—will be helped in San Francisco by the large turnout spawned by the Migden-Leno race.

Alignment With Corporate-San Francisco:

Of all of the attempts to frame the Migden-Leno race, the weakest may be the notion that one of the candidates’ is more of a “tool” of downtown interests. Since neither has the personal wealth to self-finance their campaigns, both have had no choice but to turn for support to people and groups that are not progressive.

Supervisor Daly, who appears to have made the Migden campaign a top political priority, has long argued that Leno’s campaign consultants—Barnes, Mosher & Whitehurst—are the same people launching hit-pieces against progressive supervisorial candidates. He is correct.

But what makes this such a fun argument is that many of the most outrageous hit-pieces, such as those targeting Gerardo Sandoval, were funded in part by GAP founder and Republican billionaire, Donald Fisher.  Fisher is a major donor and close ally of Carole Migden.

When one examines Migden’s long and close relationship with Willie Brown, who represented the heart of evil for Daly and others until Gavin Newsom came along, the notion that she is somehow the anti-corporate, anti-downtown, anti-machine candidate is laughable. And Mark Leno also has close ties to forces in constituencies that are often hostile to progressive interests.

That’s why focusing on funders and campaign consultants makes less sense in a race like this one where the candidates have a history of legislative action that can be evaluated.

Who Will Best Serve San Francisco:

For me, this should be the only question. I know that tenants are not the only San Francisco/Marin/Sonoma constituencies that need help from the State Legislature, and the district needs a State Senator who will most effectively represent these interests.

Wouldn’t it be great if the debates at the Milk Club and elsewhere were about the candidates’ effectiveness in Sacramento, rather than the current roster of non-issues?
Bay Area voters routinely complain about the important issues left out of presidential debates, and we have only ourselves to blame if we allow the Migden-Leno race to descend into personal attacks that only demean the candidates and their supporters.

Send feedback to [email protected]