Tag Archives: CDP

Los Angeles Area

Operation Game Changer

(Thanks to Fera, the CDP’s online specialist – promoted by Brian Leubitz)

Step Up and Become a Game Changer to Increase Democratic Turnout in California.

This month the California Democratic Party launched Operation Game Changer in Los Angeles County. The goal of the project is to increase statewide Democratic turnout by increasing the number of Democrats registered to Vote-by-Mail (VBM) in LA County.

“There are more than 2 million Democratic voters in Los Angeles County alone, more than any other County in California. But only 19% of those Democrats are registered to Vote-by-Mail. The statewide average is actually 39%. This is a problem for Democrats.  If we can improve our VBM percentage in LA County it will have the effect of boosting statewide Democratic turnout,” said Shawnda Westly, executive director for the California Democratic Party.

Voters registered to Vote-by-Mail are more likely to turnout to vote. Our field representatives love VBM because it allows campaign Get Out The Vote operations to target base-voters for turnout weeks before Election Day.

That’s why we need more California Democrats to step up and commit to becoming Game Changers and convert as many LA County Democrats over to Vote-by-Mail as possible.

Please visit our special Operation Game Changer site: www.operationgamechanger.com and sign up to volunteer.

Budget

Burton To Run For Re-Election as CDP Chair

10 Comments

After some nudging from a list of Democratic activists, longtime San Francisco politician aims to increase stability in Democratic Party

by Brian Leubitz

As you may know, I am a regional director for the state Democratic party.  As a San Franciscan, I have tremendous respect for the work that Sen. John Burton has done for our community and for the state.  He is a progressive that will fight for his beliefs.

But it turns out he knows how to lead a state Democratic party.  He knows how to hire a good team and let them run a solid organization.  Since he assumed control, the party has been in a much better financial situation, has spoken out on issues that it was too timid to discuss before, and oh, by the way, also managed to sweep statewide during a tough election year.

And as somebody who, as a statewide field director, relied heavily on the state Democratic Party’s field operation last year, I know that John Burton and his team know how to mobilize voters and win elections.  It was for these reasons I was glad to sign on to a letter asking him to run again, and equally glad to hear that he’s running again.

California Democratic party chair John Burton, 78, hasn’t officially announced it yet — but he has made the decision to run for another term to lead the party in 2013, the Chronicle has learned.

The plain-spoken, tough-talking Burton — one of the most battle-scarred of California political veterans — was urged earlier this month to run for another term by a host of party activists and insiders. Their efforts were expressed by two party leaders, CDP regional director for San Francisco Brian Leubitz — who’s also the Calitics blog director — and Alice Huffman, NAACP president, in a letter earlier this month. The group expressed “strong support” of Burton’s next term and urged him to announce his decision for another term.(SF Gate)

The day he was elected as chair, Sen. Burton called on President Obama to bring our troops home from both Iraq and Afghanistan. And he has continued to challenge the Democratic Party to dream big. He’s done well, and the party will be lucky to have him and the strong team that he’s built (and convinced to stick around).

By the way, Burton had some choice words for the Republicans debating in our state right now.  Check that out over the flip.

In Advance of Tonight’s GOP Presidential Debate in California, Democrats Release New Numbers on Job Losses in California Which Would Result From GOP’s Extreme Budget Policies

GOP’s Support of Tea Party Budget Plan Would Cost 931,570 Californians Their Job

Sacramento – In advance of Wednesday night’s GOP Presidential debate at the Reagan Library in Simi Valley, the California Democratic Party released an estimate of the number of jobs which would be lost in California, based on a new analysis conducted by the DNC, as a result of the GOP Presidential candidates support for radical economic policies.

The DNC’s analysis found that just the balanced budget amendment called for in the GOP plan, if in place in 2012, would result in the loss of 9.5 million American jobs including 931,570 jobs right here in California. The loss of so many jobs could blow a hole in the U.S. economy and further damage recovery prospects while adding millions of Americans to the ranks of the jobless.

Statement of California Democratic Party Chairman John Burton:

“Tonight’s debate will be a showcase for an extremist agenda that promises much but ultimately results in more corporate profits for the few and the privileged and more layoffs for Californians struggling to get by. The draconian cuts to Social Security, education, health care, Medicare, infrastructure and job training supported by these Republican candidates would cost millions their job.

Californians are still busy digging their way out of the mess produced by the last bad batch of Republican policies and we don’t need more of the same.”

Link to DNC Report

Uncategorized

Recap of CDP E-Board

4 Comments

PhotobucketA bit of controversy at the General Session

by Brian Leubitz

While CDP Executive Board delegates seemed to be on edge about the debt ceiling debate, the meeting also contained a fair bit on the accomplishment side.  The big news from the CDP was an effort in Los Angeles County to register far more PAVs for the next round of elections.  The PAV numbers in LA are far below other counties, and the associated drops in turnout particularly affects minority turnout.  Even if we just get LA County to parity with other counties in the state, we could be looking at an extra half million votes.  That sure would have made my life easier in the Kamala Harris race last year.  Kudos to the CDP for their work on the project, we’ll be anxiously watching the results in the coming months.

But that certainly wasn’t the only news.  As I explained yesterday, there were a few issues of controversy at the CDP e-board this weekend.  First, the death penalty resolution that called for the conversion of all sentences to permanent incarceration was passed without much dissent at all.  While there was resistance at the April convention for political reasons, that seems to have melted away with the prominent support of CDP chair John Burton.

On the other hand, the fight over bylaws changes was not so easy.  The easy cases for the handling of endorsements in the 2012 were handled quickly.  Endorsements for the 2012 election will be made at the Feb 10-12, 2012 CDP convention.  If the endorsed candidate does not proceed to the general election, there will be another endorsing caucus in the district.  The big issue was if the party wanted to endorse somebody who did not express a Democratic preference.  

There were quite a few speeches back and forth on the subject, including CYD VP Hillary Blackerby who strongly opposed allowing non-Democrats to get the state party’s endorsement.  This opinion ultimately carried the day, but only just.  Because amending the bylaws of the state party requires a 2/3 vote, the majority that supported the change was not able to succeed.

The other controversial issue was the change of the “convention pull” process for endorsements. Under the current rules, Democrats who did not get the endorsement in the regional caucus at the convention could bring the endorsement to the floor by getting 300 signatures.  After verification, these endorsements then went to the floor for debate.  The Mark Leno/Carole Migden episode was one of these events.  But this is problematic for a couple for reasons.  

First, the verification process requires an excessive amount of staff time.  On the leniency side, getting 300 signatures at an event of approximately 2000 isn’t really all that high of a barrier to entry.  There should be more respect for the opinion of the local delegates, but no so much as to allow the Democratic brand to be carried into the gutter.  A corollary of this issue is that legislative caucuses are known to pack the local caucuses with delegates in their region. In fact, in that Leno/Migden race, about 15% of all delegates were in the 3rd Senate district.  Obviously that was unacceptable, and legislators are now only allowed to appoint half of their delegates outside of the district they represent.

The solution presented over the weekend was to allow appeal to a board composed of the regional director and Chair appointed members of standing committees.  The main concern with this process was that it would essentially be a yes-man for the earlier decision to avoid controversy.  Whether that would have been true won’t be known, as after all the speeches from both sides the rule failed to gain the necessary votes.

However, I think there is a lot of room to build a process that reduces the load on CDP staff while still preserving the convention pull process.  I think you’ll hear more about that in the next few months, but the contours seem anything but clear now.  These issues certainly need to be addressed as soon as feasible.

These issues will eventually be settled.  And with that being said, the executive board was an overall success as we head into another election season.  

Uncategorized

CDP Executive Board Meeting: Rules Changes and the Death Penalty

General session will feature debates over the death penalty and some controversial rules changes

By Brian Leubitz

CDP executive board meetings tend to be sedate affairs featuring more schmoozing than anything else.  But on occasion the closing general sessions feature a few fireworks, and today may be such a day.

First, a death penalty resolution that called for the commutation of all death penalty sentences to Permanent Incarceration passed through the Resolutions committee with only a minor tweak.  The resolution originally called for all sentences to be changed to life without parole, but it has been changed to permanent incarceration.  With Chairman Burton’s support, it seems likely to pass.

On the other hand, as I discussed in an earlier post, there are a few potential rules changes to be discussed today.  First, there is that possibility of endorsing Dts voters in the top 2 primary system.  That change has dominated the conversation, but another change just might end up creating quite the stir as well.

Under the current endorsement rules, a Democratic candidate that loses  the endorsement in the regional caucus at the convention can gather signatures to bring the endorsement to the floor.  The change would instead allow the candidate to appeal to a board that would then decide whether the endorsement should proceed to a floor debate.  This would end the gathering of signatures, (as happened in the case of Mark Leno against Carole Migden) and the processing and the associated resource questions.  On the other hand, questions of stacking may still arise.  Whether this board would be as responsive remains to be seen.

The general session runs from 10 until noon this morning.

Budget

De Facto CA GOP Leader Grover Norquist Needs a New De Facto Job

8 Comments

Washington, D.C. insider and anti-tax zealot Grover Norquist was recently quoted by conservative columnist Debra Saunders in the SF Chronicle as saying “I think golf and cocaine would be more constructive ways to spend one’s free time than negotiating with Democrats on spending restraint.”

I have always considered golf a good walk spoiled.  As a recovering cocaine addict, I am surprised that anyone would think that it is at all constructive to spend one’s free time using that drug.

One would think that Mr. Norquist made this comment with a straw in his hand bending over a mirror full of white powder.

This is the man the California Republican Party is taking its cues from when it comes to tackling our state’s budget crisis.

It’s no wonder California Republicans find themselves out of touch not only with California voters on the whole, but even with an increasingly smaller percentage of Californians who self-identify as Republican voters.

A recent Field Poll showed that 61% of California voters were in favor of holding a special election to vote on a package of spending cuts and temporary tax increases to balance our budget. Even 56% of California Republicans are in favor of the idea.

Instead Republican leaders in Sacramento are taking their lead from their de facto leader in Washington, D.C., Grover Norquist. This isn’t good for Californians, it isn’t good for our budget process and it isn’t even good for the Republican Party.

Californians must be trusted to exercise their right to vote – that’s how things work in a democracy. What remains of the sensible part of the Republican Party needs to speak loudly against out of touch, and out-to-lunch Republicans like Grover Norquist.

California

HOT: Be The Change: Be A Delegate-California Democratic Party: Put YOURSELF In The Driver’s Seat!

Having been a 2008 Obama National Delegate and attended recent California State Conventions first as an observer in San Jose and then as an alternate, in Sacramento, I can tell you that there is nothing quite like being in a convention center or, in my case, a National Democratic Convention at Mile High Stadium in Denver with “50 Thousand” or so like minded folks. You CAN be the change, you really can make a difference, on your street, zip code, town, city, State and National levels. Plus make many new friends in the process. The following notice showed up in my inbox and I am passing along. Good Luck! California Democratic Party needs as many Progressive Voices as can possibly be elected. TAG, as Thom Hartmann would say, YOU ARE IT.

In 2010 California Democrats bucked a national trend and won eight of nine statewide offices, with the race for Attorney General still being counted.

A huge part of our success was because California Democrats from up and down the state volunteered their time, made phone calls, donated money, knocked on doors, and participated in our biggest Get out the Vote effort ever.

If you were part of our team and you want to stay involved, a great way to do that is by running to be a delegate to our 2011 and 2012 state conventions

The California Democratic Party will hold elections in each of California’s 80 Assembly Districts on January 8 & 9, 2011.  At these meetings, registered Democrats will elect 12 delegates from each Assembly District to be members of the California Democratic Party State Central Committee.

Now is your opportunity to help direct the future of Democrats in California! Delegates approve the platform of the Party, elect Party officers and endorse candidates for congress, state legislature, and executive office.

If elected, you will automatically become a delegate to the California Democratic Party’s state convention, which will be held April 29 – May 1, 2011 in Sacramento, as well as the convention in 2012.

If you are interested in running you must file with the State Party by 12:00 noon, Thursday, December 9, 2010.

Why be a Delegate?

Attend annual convention

Network with other Democrats

Represent your constituency

Elect Party officers

Promote the California Democratic Party agenda

Endorse candidates for statewide, legislative and congressional office

Vote to endorse resolutions and ballot measures

Reorganization of the Democratic State Central Committee (DSCC) begins at the end of 2010 and goes through February 7, 2011. Members of the DSCC (also known as “Delegates”) come from the following sources:

Elected through County Committees

Appointed by Democratic Elected Officials / Nominees

Elected through Assembly District

The Assembly District Delegates (ADDs) and Assembly District Executive Board representatives (“EBd Reps”) are elected at Assembly District Election Meetings (ADEMs) held in each of the 80 Assembly Districts. The California Democratic Party is convening ADEMs on January 8 and 9, 2011, where 12 people (6 men / 6 women) from each Assembly District will be elected to represent their district for both the 2011 and 2012 State Conventions.

Online filing for ADD will begin on November 9 and will run through December 9, 2010.  

CLICK HERE TO BEGIN THE APPLICATION PROCESS (Link likely does not work-see below)

Key Dates / Deadlines

November 9 Application for ADD available online (This means Get BUSY)

November 22 Weekly online posting of candidates begins

December 3 Notification of ADEM meeting and post on website

December 9 Deadline for ADD application

December 10 ADEM Locations posted on website

January 8, 9, 2011 ADEM elections

Cross-Posted From FreeFlightNewMedia.TypePad.Com. Visit for more in today’s mostly hottest National and Regional Political News and Views.

Link to THIS POST, in the event links embedded do not work: http://bit.ly/94l0Nw Copy and paste may be necessary.

Budget

Budget Rescue: Jeff Denham Edition





Since members of the CDP’s Budget Rescue Team started picking up their phones to ask Republican legislators where they stand on the Democrats’ sensible budget proposals last month, we’ve started getting some interesting responses.

Volunteer dbunn contacted Senator Jeff Denham (R-Merced-Modesto-Salinas)’s office, where a staffer reportedly said, “Sen. Denham is opposed to the Dem budget proposals” — and went on to defend this anti-democratic “superminority” rule!

This kind of statement shows what we’ve been saying all along: that Republicans would rather hold the state hostage than work with Democrats to govern effectively, We have to continue to put the pressure on budget extremists like Jeff Denham and get all of his colleagues on the record to make sure they know people are watching them if they try to hold the state hostage again.

See our easy instructions, and our progress, below and get started today!

Will you call a Republican legislator today and urge them to tell us where they stand on the Democratic budget proposals? You can call any Republican in any district — see below for a grid of our progress and instructions for how to make your call.  When you have their statement, report it by leaving a message in the comments to this thread or emailing [email protected]

There’s a lot working against us getting a fair budget deal, like the rule that lets a “superminority” of 1/3 plus one legislators veto any budget the majority approves.  But there are some very concrete ways these calls help:



1. Maybe California can end up with a better budget. By getting Republicans on the record early, Democrats can be proactive in building our budget strategy and get Democrats and progressives the negotiating leverage we need.

With Democratic budget proposals that add revenue to avoid cuts to poverty protections, and a Schwarzenegger cuts-only budget that would put an additional 430,000 people out of work, the more progress we can make here the better.

2. We can definitely build a strong case against Republicans. The past few years, Republicans have held our state hostage to their extreme anti-revenue ideology by holding up the budget.  But right now, many Californians just think “the legislature” is to blame for our annual budget problems: They don’t realize the central role Republicans play

That’s not an accurate picture, and these statements will help us make the case that the budget is late again because Republicans are holding us hostage, not “because both sides couldn’t agree.”

3. We can definitely change things this fall. If we can educate the public on the reason our budget problems get worse every year (Republicans) and the conditions that enable it (a minority can veto the majority’s budget), we can take a Republican seat or two and pass Proposition 25 — the majority vote budget initiative.

See our easy instructions, and our progress, below and get started today!

Get a Republican On the Record About the Budget

&#160 1. Select any Republican who hasn’t given a statement yet from one of the grids below.

&#160 2. Call the Republican’s office and say something like this:

You: Hi, my name is [your name], and I’m calling to ask if [Republican’s name] is planning on supporting the budget Democrats have released in [Republican’s chamber — Assembly or Senate].

Them: No.

You: Can you tell me why [Republican] would rather hold out than support the Democrats’ budget?

Them: [Explanation]



&#160 3. Post a comment below reporting who you called and what they said.

That’s it!

Republican Assembly Member District Phone number Plans to vote yes or no? Statement they gave you
Anthony Adams 59th District – Claremont (916) 319-2059    
Joel Anderson 77th District – El Cajon (916) 319-2077    
Bill Berryhill 26th District – Stockton (916) 319-2026    
Tom Berryhill 25th District – Modesto (916) 319-2025    
Sam Blakeslee 33rd District – San Luis Obispo (916) 319-2033    
Connie Conway 34th District – Visalia (916) 319-2034 Hasn’t decided yet Needs follow-up
Paul Cook 65th District – Yucaipa (916) 319-2065    
Chuck DeVore 70th District – Irvine (916) 319-2070    
Nathan Fletcher 75th District – San Diego (916) 319-2075 Hasn’t decided yet “Will probably suggest changes.” Needs follow-up
Jean Fuller 32nd District – Bakersfield (916) 319-2032    
Ted Gaines 4th District – Roseville (916) 319-2004    
Martin Garrick 74th District – Carlsbad (916) 319-2074    
Danny D. Gilmore 30th District – Hanford (916) 319-2030    
Curt Hagman 60th District – Chino Hills (916) 319-2060    
Diane L. Harkey 73rd District – Oceanside (916) 319-2073    
Kevin Jeffries 66th District – Murrieta (916) 319-2066    
Steve Knight 36th District – Palmdale (916) 319-2036    
Dan Logue 3rd District – Chico (916) 319-2003    
Jeff Miller 71st District – Mission Viejo (916) 319-2071    
Brian Nestande 64th District – Riverside (916) 319-2064    
Roger Niello 5th District – Sacramento (916) 319-2005 No From a mailer: “there will not be votes amongst legislative Republicans for new taxes [on oil companies extracting oil in California]”
Jim Nielsen 2nd District – Redding (916) 319-2002    
Chris Norby 72nd District – Brea (916) 319-2072    
Jim Silva 67th District – Huntington Beach (916) 319-2067    
Cameron Smyth 38th District – Santa Clarita (916) 319-2038 Hasn’t decided yet “We don’t want to hold up the budget again this year.” Needs follow-up.
Audra Strickland 37th District – Westlake Village (916) 319-2037    
Van Tran 68th District – Costa Mesa (916) 319-2068    
Michael N. Villines 29th District – Fresno (916) 319-2029    
Republican Senator District Phone number Plans to vote yes or no? Statement they gave you
Dennis Hollingsworth 36th District – Temecula, El Cajon (916) 651-4036    
Sam Aanestad 4th District – Nevada City, Chico, Redding (916) 651-4004    
Roy Ashburn 18th District – Bakersfield (916) 651-4018    
Dave Cogdill 14th District – Fresno, Ripon (916) 651-4014    
Dave Cox 1st District – Roseville, Jackson, Quincy (916) 651-4001 Doubtful “Dave does not support raising any taxes or fees,” but his staffer could not specifically say which programs he would cut. (from Budget Rescue Team member Gina M. via email)
Update: Since this information was reported, Dave Cox has passed away. Our condolences to his family.
Jeff Denham 12th District – Merced, Modesto, Salinas (916) 651-4012 Qualified no “Sen. Denham is opposed to the Dem budget proposals.” Likes the 1/3 rule.
Robert Dutton 31st District – Rancho Cucamonga, Riverside (916) 651-4031    
Bill Emmerson 37th District – Riverside, Palm Desert (916) 651-4037    
Tom Harman 35th District – Costa Mesa (916) 651-4035    
Bob Huff 29th District – Walnut (916) 651-4029    
George Runner 17th District – Antelope Valley, Victorville, Santa Clarita (916) 651-4017    
Tony Strickland 19th District – Simi Valley, Santa Barbara (916) 651-4019    
Mimi Walters 33rd District – Laguna Hills (916) 651-4033    
Mark Wyland 38th District – San Juan Capistrano, Carlsbad (916) 651-4038    
Budget

California Democratic Party Fails California & Democrats

3 Comments

In the month of June, with the Constitutional Deadline to pass a budget, the CDP did one move on the budget. And it was pathetic. There was no Theory of Change, no path for what they were doing to result in passing a budget quicker, or passing a more just budget. It was quite honestly one of the most pathetic online moves I have ever seen by a state party — anywhere in the country.

And then they got defensive. They started censoring comments at Calitics, giving a ‘0’ rating to disappear any criticism. They censored, again and again and again and again.

I’m trying to figure out how the California Democratic Party could have failed so completely, I think it might have gone something like this:

California Democrats deserve at least basic competence. There was nothing of the sort with a stone’s throw of this whole fiasco. First, there was the sin of omission, by not engaging in any actions that could have helped pass a just budget. Next, there was this pathetic move, that just made the CDP look incompetent (phone calls to 4 legislators is all they accomplished during the last week before the budget ran out, with half those calls coming from consultants or their mothers?). Third, any preteen can explain to you that trying to censor online just results in more people seeing what is trying to be hid. Forth, they didn’t quickly realize that their move was a blunder of epic proportions and react with something that would have helped.

And this isn’t just about the budget, with the CDP lacking basic competence online, how are they going to help Jerry Brown or Barbara Boxer or Gavin Newsom or Kamala Harris?

California Democrats deserve better.

Uncategorized

Students, Gavin Newsom, and the 2010 CDP Convention

After the preparations had been made, the tally sheets from our phone calls completed, the carpools worked out, and the volunteers scheduled, I headed to Los Angeles with the hope that after the weekend was complete, there would be no question in the minds of the CDP delegates that Gavin Newsom has the grassroots support necessary to win the Lt. Governor’s race against whatever the GOP throws at us in November.

In the weeks prior to the convention, our team of students from all across the state had been talking to delegates, volunteers, and fellow young voters about Mayor Newsom’s candidacy and about his bold, new ideas that will be required to dig California out of our seemingly never ending state of economic misery.

The pitch was not hard to make. Young people are drawn to Newsom’s campaign. We see public higher education becoming unaffordable to more and more Californians. We fear that in five or ten years our state won’t be able to compete in an evolving global economy, and we worry that the living wage jobs that we will need in order to support our families will be harder and harder to find. While we are confident that our state will come to its senses when it comes to Gay Marriage and LGBT rights, we are concerned that the relentless beat of the status quo won’t provide the framework necessary to drastically change the way we look at issues like immigration, the environment, and budget & tax reform. We have watched the forces of regressiveness drag our state (and our futures) under the surface, and we are ready and eager to support Gavin Newsom, who has proven time and time again in San Francisco that tangible change is not only possible, but it is also necessary.

This is why over 100 enthusiastic volunteers showed up to the state Democratic Party convention this weekend in support of Gavin Newsom. If you were in LA, you may have seen us trailing the candidate as he greeted throngs of excited delegates in the hallways, waiting in the back of crowded caucus rooms to welcome him and hear him speak, or waving signs and holding coffees while passing out muffins on a street corner early on Saturday morning.

The high number of young people supporting Gavin Newsom’s campaign for LG is a testament to the appeal of his dynamic candidacy and engaging personality. Young voters are the bellwether of the coming decades of California Politics, and we are ready to not only vote for, but also work to produce real change. We came out in full force for President Obama, we overwhelmingly opposed Props 4 and 8, and we vented our fear and anger over cuts to higher education during protests up and down the state this past year.

Young people have proven over the last two years that we are ready to lead the next wave of progressive politics in this state. We look at Sacramento and see a broken system that needs fixing, quickly. Income inequality is on the rise, unemployment is approaching record highs, and an archaic budget and tax code protects the interests of the most conservative politicians in the state and stifles any hope of reform. At the same time, we turn to San Francisco and see a city with universal healthcare, universal pre-school, paid sick-leave, and the highest minimum wage in the nation, and we are given a reason to have hope for the future. Because of his track record, my generation feels that we share a vision for the future with Gavin Newsom.  Because of this, we are ready to ensure that he has the opportunity to prove himself on a statewide level. If you were at the convention last weekend, you may have caught a glimpse of that.

You can join Students for Gavin Newsom on Facebook: facebook.com/studentsfornewsom

California, Election 2010

Burton’s Behavior as Chair: Epic Fail

2 Comments

The general buzz leading up to last week’s California Democratic Party Convention was mostly about the need to energize and motivate the party faithful for the 2010 midterm election.  The conventional wisdom is that the party faces an uphill battle in the midterms due to historical trends (the president’s party generally loses seats in the midterms), and political ones (the teapartiers bring nothing if not enthusiasm).  There is also the general ennui that has set in since President Obama’s inauguration in January, 2009.  The reality of governance has created tension within the party, and there is general concern that liberals and progressives will stay home on election night.  All of these factors set the stakes very high for John Burton’s first convention as Chair of the party.  I wish I could say that he was able to answer the call.

From all appearances, it looked like the Chair was barely able to answer the call to get out of bed.  Sporting a red bowling shirt (Note to John: the party color is blue.  The other guys are red) with an uncooperative white t-shirt underneath on Saturday, Chair Burton stumbled and grumbled around on the dais as if nursing a very bad hangover.  Apparently there is some charm in his preferred demeanor, but I was unable to grasp it.  I realize that the Chair should not be the source for words of inspiration, but is some enthusiasm too much to ask?  From handwaving through the votes by acclamation to searching for the next item on the agenda, there was the appearance that the Chair was winging it.  For Saturday’s agenda this was not such a serious problem, since the general session was primarily a series of speeches, including very good ones from Senator Boxer and Governor/Mayor/Attorney General Jerry Brown.

On Sunday, however, the Chair’s inability to adhere to procedure had some very detrimental effects on the proceedings, and, at least for this delegate, on the enthusiasm of the audience.  Sunday is the day for business at the convention.  We vote on endorsements, platform issues, rules, etc.  We also find out the results of the endorsement votes that were held Saturday afternoon.  The Chair gave the results between speeches as if he had something better to do.  Then it came time to vote on the endorsement for the 36th Congressional District.  Jane Harman is the CA36 incumbent and is being challenged by Marcy Winograd.  An endorsement caucus had been held on Saturday, which Harman had won.  Winograd was able to gather enough signatures, however, to force a final vote on the floor on Sunday.  It almost didn’t happen.

The Chair garbled the endorsement question so badly that I was not sure what we were voting on.  Apparently I wasn’t the only one.  The first vote was a voice vote, and the “Ayes” and “Nays” sounded pretty equal to my ear; nevertheless, the Chair ruled that the Ayes had it.  I was puzzled, not only because of the ruling, but also I recalled that when we had a floor vote two years ago (Leno versus Migden), both sides were given 4 minutes to present their case.  This time the vote was taken without speeches, even though Winograd’s troops were lined up at one of the microphones.  Fortunately a delegate went to another microphone and asked basically what we had voted on and protested that it wasn’t clear.  The Chair bristled.  While he was bristling, Winograd’s forces had made their way up to the dais and protested that they had not been able to speak.  The Chair first berated Ms. Winograd for asserting her rights under the rules, then went back to the parliamentarian for a ruling.  Both flustered and frustrated, the Chair allotted 4 minutes each to Winograd and Harman.  

Both sides passionately presented their case.  The Winograd team made the argument that the endorsement reflects on the party as a whole, so it is only fitting that the entire delegation have a chance to overturn a district’s vote.  Harman’s forces took the opposite side, questioning the fairness of the ability of the entire delegation to overturn a district’s endorsement.  The vote would proceed by a show of delegate cards, but even this didn’t go smoothly.  Supposedly cards were counted, but many delegates did not see counters in their region.  The vote had to be done again.  The second time took longer and it appeared as if there were enough counters, although some delegates were still not sure if they were counted.  Again the Chair looked as if this were his first time doing this, and was not in control of the proceedings.  As the counts were tallied, another speech or two intervened.

Finally the vote was announced, and it was rather close.  The Chair made some crack about nobody being bribed for their vote, which was really bush league.  I guess it was an attempt at humor to lighten the mood.  Winograd protested on another point, but I was unable to hear what it was.  Burton again rebuked her, telling her she should get her people organized better.  This was again bad form on the part of the Chair.  The Chair is in a privileged position and should not be taking potshots at people who are asserting their rights as candidates, delegates, etc.  The Chair should rule but not opine.  Full disclosure:  I  did not support Winograd’s bid to overturn the endorsement; I agreed with the Harman camp reasoning.

One final episode cemented the impression that Burton was winging it the entire weekend.  The platform committee did not recognize the author of an item that the committee had sent over to the Rules Committee even though this person had been standing at one of the microphones during the Platform Committee (PC) report.  The  PC report was then voted on without discussion.  The Chair failed to see the speaker as well, but tried to make amends by allowing the speaker to address the audience from the dais for two minutes later on.

The session limped home to an odd but fitting conclusion when one delegate asked for a quorum call even though there was no more business at hand.  Maybe they just wanted to leave.  Apparently the convention ended, and we were headed out the door.  No calls to action.  No rousing finish.

None of this criticism is meant to take away anything from John Burton’s years of exemplary public service.  He has done more for California than I could ever hope to do, but the party’s “Back to the Future” gambit is having the effect I feared that it would.  Many of the young democrats and Obama supporters who put the party over the top have never heard of John Burton, and don’t know a thing about Brown’s governorship.  There was nothing said or done by the Chair that gave me confidence that the party is connecting with these vital new voters.  If the goal of the Chair for this convention was to energize and motivate the base for 2010, my conclusion is that he failed, epically.