SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
tom perez
What Can Be Done About the Left’s Diminished DNC Presence?
The recent race for DNC chair raises questions about how the progressive wing of the party can and should move forward toward 2028.
Feb 09, 2025
Just before starting to write my lament about what a dramatic step backward the recent campaign for Democratic National Committee chair had been, I opened an Our Revolution email that told me, “We beat back the party establishment at the DNC.”
Now Our Revolution being a direct organizational descendent of the 2020 Bernie Sanders presidential campaign, and me having been a 2016 Sanders convention delegate, I feel pretty confident that our ideas of who “we” means are pretty much the same. So what accounts for the widely divergent takes?
For those who haven’t been following this, Minnesota’s Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party Chair Ken Martin was just elected to lead the DNC for the next four years, defeating Wisconsin Democratic Party Chair Ben Wikler by a 246.5–134.5 vote margin. There was no contested election four years ago, because by tradition a just-elected president selects the new chair; contested elections generally follow defeats. In the last one, in 2017, former Obama administration Secretary of Labor Tom Perez won the job, beating Minnesota Rep. Keith Ellison in a second round of voting, 235--200.
At the moment there is no one obviously positioned to take up the Sanders’ mantle in the 2028 presidential campaign.
Ellison’s candidacy came in the wake of his having been just the second member of Congress to support Sanders in the prior year’s presidential primaries, and the fact that Sanders people harbored serious grievances with the DNC over its perceived favoritism for the ultimate nominee, Hillary Clinton, lent a distinct edge to the election, bringing it considerably more buzz than the one that just occurred. At the time, former Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank, a vociferous opponent of Sanders’ run—who had once declared, “The most effective thing liberals and progressives can do to advance our public policy goals... is to help Clinton win our nomination early in the year”—now thought there was “a great deal to be said for putting an active Sanders supporter in there,” so as to clear the air “of suspicions and paranoia.” But Clinton and Barack Obama apparently didn’t think so, and Clinton’s past Obama cabinet colleague, Perez, took up the torch in a race that produced a level of grassroots involvement seldom if ever before seen in this contest.
Although the office is traditionally considered organizational rather than ideological and the 2017 candidates did run on those issues, the underlying political differences were obvious to all. This time around, the race was generally understood to involve little if any political disagreement on the issues. By way of explaining its support for new party chair Martin, Our Revolution characterized runner-up Wikler, as “an establishment candidate backed by Nancy Pelosi, Hakeem Jeffries, and Chuck Schumer, and bankrolled by the billionaire class.” We understand that election campaigns are about sharpening the perception of differences between the candidates, but still this seems a rather thin, flimsy basis for hailing the vote as an anti-establishment triumph, given that Martin has publicly stated that he doesn’t want the party to take money from "those bad billionaires" only from "good billionaires;”and one of the two billionaires who gave a quarter million dollars to Wikler’s campaign was George Soros—probably the DNC’s model “good billionaire.” Besides Musk/Bezos/Zuckerberg probably aren’t thinking of donating anyhow. Oh, and Chuck Schumer actually supported Ellison eight years ago.
Actually, “we” did have a horse in the race—2020 Sanders campaign manager Faiz Shakir. Shakir, who has been running a nonprofit news organization called More Perfect Union, dedicated to “building power for the working class,” argued that Democrats needed a pitch for building a pro-worker economy to go with their criticism of U.S. President Donald Trump’s policy proposals. His viewpoint presented a serious alternative to that of Martin, who told a candidates forum that “we’ve got the right message... What we need to do is connect it back with the voters,”—seemingly a tough position to maintain following an election in which NBC’s 20-state exit polling showed the majority of voters with annual household incomes under $100,000 voting Republican, while the majority of those from over-$100,000 households voted Democrat. But even though Shakir was a DNC member and thereby able to get the 40 signatures of committee members needed to run, he entered the race far too late to be taken for a serious contender and ultimately received but two votes.
Mind you, none of this critique comes as a criticism of the work of the two state party chairs who were the principal contenders. Martin touts the fact that Democrats have won every statewide election in Minnesota in the 14 years that he has chaired the party, and anyone who understands the effort that goes into political campaign work can only admire that achievement. Nor is Our Revolution to be criticized for taking the time to discern what they thought would be the best possible option in a not terribly exciting race that was nevertheless of some importance.
At the same time it’s hard not to regret the diminished DNC presence of the “we” that Our Revolution spoke of, after “we” legitimately contended for power in the last contested election. Certainly this lack of interest was in no small part a consequence of the extraordinary circumstances that produced a presidential nominee who had not gone before the voters in a single primary—for the first time since Hubert Humphrey in 1968.
More importantly, it raises a serious question for those of us who believe that the structure and history of the American political system require the left’s engagement in the Democratic Party—uncomfortable and unpleasant as that may be at times. As the social scientists like to say, politics abhors a vacuum, and absent a national Democratic Party presence for the perspective that motivated the Sanders campaigns, people seeking action on the big questions on the big stage may start to look elsewhere. And elsewhere always looms the possibility of the cul-de-sac of yet of another third party candidacy that holds interesting conventions and debates, but ultimately receives only a small share of the vote, but a large share of the blame for the election of a Republican president.
At the moment there is no one obviously positioned to take up the Sanders’ mantle in the 2028 presidential campaign. But we may have to make it our business to find one.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'We Did It!' Workers in Maryland Vote to Form First US Apple Store Union
"This victory shows the growing demand for unions at Apple stores and different industries across our nation," said the head of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers.
Jun 19, 2022
After Apple employees in Maryland voted Saturday to form the tech giant's first retail store union in the United States, workers' rights advocates across the country celebrated the "pathbreaking win for labor."
"We love our jobs. We just want to see them do better."
Workers at the store in Towson recently organized into the Coalition of Organized Retail Employees (CORE) and have decided to join the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM).
"We did it!" IAM declared on Twitter, welcoming the Towson workers.
IAM international president Robert Martinez Jr. in a statement that "I applaud the courage displayed by CORE members at the Apple store in Towson for achieving this historic victory. They made a huge sacrifice for thousands of Apple employees across the nation who had all eyes on this election."
"I ask Apple CEO Tim Cook to respect the election results and fast-track a first contract for the dedicated IAM CORE Apple employees in Towson," Martinez added. "This victory shows the growing demand for unions at Apple stores and different industries across our nation."
The win in Maryland comes as Amazon and Starbucks workers across the nation are also pushing for unions--and the companies are fighting back.
Apple is no different, according to More Perfect Union and The Washington Post, which reported that "Saturday evening's initial tally was 65-33, and the official count was pending."
While an Apple representative declined to comment, Towson worker Billy Jarboe told the newspaper that the company's campaign to undermine the union drive "definitely shook people," but most supporters of the effort weren't swayed.
"It just feels good to go into a new era of this kind of work, hopefully it creates a spark [and] the other stores can use this momentum," Jarboe said.
Eric Brown, another employee in Towson, told the Post that organizers of an unsuccessful unionization campaign at an Atlanta store "let us know what some of the talking points and tactics were going to be, and we were able to let people know some of the things they may try."
Tyra Reeder similarly told The New York Times that "we kind of got some insight from the Atlanta store on things that were coming," pointing to the company's claims that a contract negitation process could lead to workers losing some benefits.
"For that to happen, a majority of us have to agree," Reeder said. "I don't think any of us would agree to lose something we love dearly, that benefits us."
As for being an Apple employee, Reeder said: "We love our jobs. We just want to see them do better."
Related Content
Atlanta Apple Store Workers File for Company's First Union Election in US
U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) was among the political figures who welcomed the development in Maryland.
"Congratulations to Apple workers in Towson, Maryland on becoming the first Apple store in the United States to form a union!" Sanders tweeted. "What we are seeing right now is a historic uprising of working-class Americans telling the corporate elite that they have to end their greed."
Tom Perez, a Democratic candidate for Maryland governor, also congratulated the Towson workers while tying their win to the broader movement currently sweeing the country.
"This is a big deal," he said. "All across our country we're seeing workers demanding fairness and dignity. So proud that the nation's first Apple store to form a union is right here in Baltimore County."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Amid Disappointment Over Party's Draft Platform, 25,000+ People Urge DNC to Adopt Climate Panel's Ambitious Policies
Critics charge Democrats' current proposal "will not go nearly far enough to secure a just and equitable transition."
Jul 23, 2020
As climate experts and advocates on Thursday continued to criticize Democratic Party officials' draft 2020 platform, the Democratic National Committee's Council on the Environment and Climate Crisis delivered petitions with over 25,000 signatures urging the DNC to incorporate the panel's bold policy recommendations.
"The climate crisis is not down the road. It is here and now. And we need bold and ambitious policies to tackle it."
--Michelle Deatrick, DNC climate councilThe council, which launched in February after months of DNC Chair Tom Perez refusing to hold a climate-focused presidential primary debate, published 14 pages of recommendations in early June. Since then, the panel's proposals have been endorsed by over 150 advocacy groups including 350.org Action, Greenpeace USA, Sierra Club, and the Sunrise Movement.
"The council's platform, centered in equity and environmental justice, is critical to developing comprehensive policies that complete the long overdue transition to clean, renewable energy and will continue to energize voters across the country," Sierra Club national political director Ariel Hayes said in a statement Thursday.
Sierra Club collected 15,000 of the petition signatures delivered to the DNC on Thursday, according to the panel. Over 5,000 more were collected by Food & Water Action, another supporter of the panel's recommendations, which include spending $10-$16 trillion on fighting the climate emergency over a decade and various emissions and renewable energy targets.
"The outpouring of support for our recommendations has been remarkable," said Michelle Deatrick, who chairs the council. "The climate crisis is not down the road. It is here and now. And we need bold and ambitious policies to tackle it. We know Republicans won't act. That is why we need Democrats to lead."
"What's more, this is how Democrats win--the polling and other data are clear. This is not only good policy, it is good politics," added Deatrick. Polling released in mid-July by Data for Progress showed that U.S. voters, particularly Democrats, want to see candidates who are committed to achieving 100% clean energy by 2035 and creating millions of jobs as part of that transition.
Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden last week unveiled a $2 trillion plan that aims to achieve a carbon pollution-free energy sector by 2035. Climate activists welcomed the plan as a "major step forward" compared with the candidate's previous proposals but also emphasized that more work needs to be done.
Earlier this week, the DNC's 2020 platform drafting subcommittee--which some critics said snubbed progressive climate activists, given the backgrounds of its 15 members--sent party delegates an 80-page draft (pdf) that the whole platform committee is set to consider on Monday and finalize before the party's August convention.
Earther's Dharna Noor, reporting on the draft Wednesday, pointed out that the climate section is longer than the party's 2012 or 2016 platforms and includes "some notable bright spots" but "still falls far short of the recommendations of leading climate scientists because it doesn't have a plan to phase out U.S. fossil fuel production or use."
" Pandemic, money, war, racism. Do Democrats realize climate change is making all those things worse?"
--Emily Atkin, climate reporter"Unlike the 2016 platform, the new draft is silent on phasing out extraction of fossil fuels... on public lands and doesn't include language to halt fracking in localities that oppose it," Noor noted. "That represents a step backward for the climate."
Johanna Bozuwa, co-manager of the climate and energy program at the Democracy Collaborative, told Noor "it is good to see commitments from the DNC platform to unionized jobs, investment in public and affordable housing, and commitments to renewable energy." However, she also offered a broad critique of the draft.
"This proposal fails to dismantle the political and economic powers in place that allow the current extractive system to perpetuate," she said, "meaning it will not go nearly far enough to secure a just and equitable transition."
Bozuwa was far from alone in criticizing the platform and calling on party officials to be bolder in confronting the climate emergency.
"The DNC platform is a thermometer for the Dems," Demos senior campaign strategist Adrien Salazar tweeted Thursday with a link to Noor's report. "The climate movement's pressure got in an aggressive clean electricity timeline and green investments--this is good. But the DNC is shying away from confronting and breaking the power of fossil fuel industry."
Salazar, in a series of tweets, welcomed some other elements of the draft and also highlighted a Thursday report about it from Emily Atkin, who runs the climate-focused newsletter HEATED.
In a list of observations about how the draft platform treats the climate crisis, Atkin detailed that the preamble doesn't even mention climate until the 15th paragraph, the draft only mentions "fossil fuels" once, and--despite mentioning the 2015 Paris climate agreement--it does not contain the phrase "1.5 degrees," the accord's more ambitious warming limit.
Atkin added:
The paragraph summarizing the "challenges before us" also does not mention the climate crisis. The third paragraph of the preamble says that Americans are facing "the worst public health crisis in a century, the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, the worst period of global upheaval in a generation, the intolerable racial injustice that still stains the fabric of our nation." Pandemic, money, war, racism. Do Democrats realize climate change is making all those things worse?
The platform, she reported, "does not say Democrats will hold fossil fuel companies accountable for climate change," whereas "the 2016 platform did mention accountability. In fact, it mentioned 'fossil fuels' four times, and acknowledged the need to ramp down production."
Atkin also noted that the advocacy group Climate Hawks Vote--founded by DNC delegate RL Miller, who has proposed amendments to the platform--has circulated a petition in response to the draft.
The DNC's draft "needs work on science, clean energy jobs, fossil fuel finance, and cars," the petition says. "Let's tell them to make the platform stronger on climate."
This post has been updated to reflect that 350.org Action endorsed the DNC climate panel's recommendations.
Keep ReadingShow Less
DNC 'Snubs' Climate Movement Just as Greenpeace Endorses Democratic Panel's Visionary Plan
"There are more big bank executives on the Democratic platform drafting committee than there are climate activists or millennials."
Jun 23, 2020
Despite mounting pressure on the party to craft a 2020 platform that includes ambitious climate policies, Democratic National Committee Chair Tom Perez on Monday announced a drafting committee that, in the words of journalist Emily Atkin, "snubs progressive climate activists again."
"As we confront the interwoven crises of climate change, white supremacy, and Covid-19, we must demand nothing short of a visionary, transformative agenda from Democratic leadership."
--Charlie Jiang, Greenpeace USA
Perez's announcement followed reporting that Democratic Party leadership was "irked" when the DNC Council on the Environment and Climate Crisis released policy recommendations for the platform on June 4 that are bolder than the proposals in presidential candidate Joe Biden's climate plan. Party insiders told Reuters the panel is an "insurgent" group that is not "taken seriously."
Several climate advocacy groups have endorsed the panel's recommendations, including Greenpeace USA on Tuesday. Charlie Jiang, a campaigner for the group, declared that "as we confront the interwoven crises of climate change, white supremacy, and Covid-19, we must demand nothing short of a visionary, transformative agenda from Democratic leadership."
Perez, for his part, said in a statement that "crafting our party platform is important work, and I'm confident that the members of this committee will engage Americans in a substantive dialogue of ideas and solutions that will articulate our party's vision for the country and mobilize voters in every community to elect Joe Biden."
However, the positions and backgrounds of those charged with drafting that Democratic Party's platform suggest the final version could fall far short of climate activists' demands. As Atkin detailed in her HEATED newsletter Tuesday:
[The] majority of people on the drafting committee are Gen Xers and Baby Boomers (average age: 55) who have either have no history of prioritizing climate; aren't on record as supporting theGreen New Deal; and/or haven't signed the No Fossil Fuel Money pledge. There's only one person on the drafting committee who could credibly considered a climate-focused Democrat. There are more big bank executives on the Democratic platform drafting committee than there are climate activists or millennials.
Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms will chair the drafting committee, Biden adviser Carmel Martin will be a non-voting member, and Rep. Barbara Lee (Calif.) will be an ex-officio member. The other members are Tony Allen (Del.), Stuart Appelbaum (N.Y.), Rep. Katherine Clark (D-Mass.), Sen. Tammy Duckworth (Ill.), Rep. Sylvia Garcia (Texas), Heather Gautney (N.Y.), Don Graves (Ohio), Rep. Deb Haaland (N.M.), Analilia Mejia (N.J.), Josh Orton (Wis.), state Sen. Jose Javier Rodriguez (Fla.), Julianne Smith (D.C.), Richard Trumka (Penn.), and former Gov. Tom Vilsack (Iowa).
Atkin created a spreadsheet of all the committee members with identifiers such as age, gender, and race as well as parts of their political histories--including whether they endorsed Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) or Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who were the two most progressive 2020 Democratic presidential primary candidates before suspending their campaigns.
Haaland is the only elected official on the committee who has signed the No Fossil Fuel Money pledge, and she and Clark are the only two members who supported Warren's presidential run, according to the spreadsheet. Just Gautney, Mejia, and Orton backed Sanders--who, as Atkin noted, "had the most aggressive climate plan."
Atkin's analysis came after she reported for HEATED last month that Michelle Deatrick, who chairs the DNC climate panel, was worried that the platform drafting committee "would be filled with people who don't prioritize progressive climate policy like the Green New Deal." As Atkin put it Tuesday: "Her fears were founded."
The DNC council launched in February to pressure the party to pursue more aggressive policies in the wake of Perez refusing to hold a climate-focused primary debate. Deatrick is a former Sanders campaign surrogate and the panel's platform recommendations largely align with the former presidential candidate's climate plan.
The panel suggested spending $10-$16 trillion on tackling the climate crisis over the next decade and committing to various emissions and renewable energy targets--specifically, "near-zero emissions by 2040; 100% clean renewable energy by 2030 in electricity generation, buildings, and transportation; and 100% zero-carbon new building infrastructure by 2025."
The council also called for prioritizing "working families above fossil fuel corporations by ensuring a just transition and building a green economy with millions of new, family-sustaining jobs" and addressing "the disproportionate environmental and climate harms to frontline and vulnerable communities"--and detailed various policies for each of those demands.
In Greenpeace USA's endorsement of the recommendations, Jiang celebrated that the council decided to "stake a bold and much-needed new direction for the Democratic Party" and expressed hope that "the many visionary and essential elements of this proposal [will be] included in the official DNC platform to be finalized in August."
"It's critical that candidates and elected officials champion a Green New Deal and a managed transition away from fossil fuels, including the end of federal permits, subsidies, and financing for oil, gas, and coal," he said. "A world beyond fossil fuels--one that prioritizes justice for workers and communities on the frontlines of the climate crisis over corporate profit--is possible if our elected officials are willing to fight for us."
"As platform negotiations continue, we hope to see more details emerge as to how the part plans to meet its important goals for achieving 100% clean power, transportation, buildings, agriculture, and industry; deploy federal investments quickly and equitably; and meaningfully engage with impacted workers and communities," Jiang added. "We must prioritize racial and economic justice for frontline communities while mobilizing the full power of the federal government to tackle the historic crises we face."
Keep ReadingShow Less
"Tom Perez's Worst Nightmare": Newly Elected DNC Member RL Miller to Push Dems on Climate
The longtime activist has set her sights on the party's platform, fossil fuel industry donations, and a climate debate in the next presidential race.
May 21, 2020
RL Miller, founder of the advocacy group Climate Hawks Vote, was elected to the Democratic National Committee last Friday--and she intends to push the Democratic Party's governing body to improve how it handles the climate crisis and fossil fuel industry, according to a Thursday interview in Emily Atkin's HEATED newsletter.
Atkin dubbed Miller "Tom Perez's worst nightmare" for the California climate activist's willingness to take the fight directly to the DNC chair. During his tenure, Perez has come under fire from campaigners and progressive party members for refusing to hold a climate debate in this year's presidential race and reversing a ban on the DNC taking fossil fuel money.
Asked by Atkin if she intends to make a lot of noise about the climate crisis within the DNC, Miller said: "I really hope to be able to tell Tom Perez, to his face, to fuck off. I shouldn't say that, should I? Oh, sure, I'll say that."
"There's so much to say about how badly he handled the climate debate. But there's one thing that infuriates me, that I was able to use to persuade people who didn't care about climate to vote for me," Miller added. "Tom Perez is running the DNC from the top down. He doesn't have the DNC body vote on major things."
In a tweet Monday confirming her election to the DNC, Miller wrote, "I ran on a platform of climate, transparency, and accountability, and I intend to keep that promise."
Miller's priorities include ensuring a climate debate for the next presidential primary, strengthening the climate language in the Democratic Party's official policy platform, and addressing Perez's 2018 resolution that reversed a short-lived ban on the DNC taking donations from fossil fuel political action committees.
"Fossil fuel money is toxic. It is drowning our democracy in a dark, oily wave," she said. "For the DNC to continue to taking fossil fuel money while it supports a pro-climate platform makes them vulnerable to charges of hypocrisy. They're trying to ban fossil fuels while they're still continuing to take fossil fuel money. What's up with that? That's wrong. So I want to fix it."
Broadly, Miller explained:
There is a lot of stuff I want to get done on the DNC, and it's going to be really slow-going because it's an institution that doesn't like change. But I fight oil companies for my day job, so I'm used to taking on tough fights.
I have tried to pass a resolution to get the DNC to stop taking fossil fuel money. I was working on the outside with [DNC member] Christine Pelosi working on the inside. We got it done. Then Tom Perez reversed us two months later. If I bring it up again, I would be on the inside. Perhaps I would be more able to make a difference.
I want to work on basic transparency. California elects 20 DNC members, and we know who our DNC members are. If people don't like what I do, they're going to vote me out of office. But there are many states where people don't know who their DNC members even are.
Miller, who lives in Southern California, is a survivor of the 2018 Woolsey Fire, which came within 500 feet of her home. "That fire made it really personal for me," Miller told Atkin, describing an exercise she does at large gatherings for the California Democratic Party as chair of the Environmental Caucus.
She begins by asking anyone from the devastated town of Paradise, California to stand up, followed by people who have been directly impacted by recent wildfires, followed by anyone who knows someone affected by the climate crisis-fueled fires.
"I've done this several times, in rooms of hundreds of people. Everybody, everybody, knows somebody," Miller said. "This is not something happening in the future. This is already happening."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Joe Biden Needs an Intervention: An Open Letter to DNC Chair Tom Perez
Right now, Biden is idling in the cockpit of a political aircraft with one wing.
Apr 30, 2020
Whatever our political differences, vast numbers of Democrats and others agree that it's imperative to defeat Donald Trump. But with scarcely five months to go before the voting starts, Joe Biden is not helping to assemble a broad tactical alliance. Instead, he's ignoring the wisdom that Jesse Jackson offered at the Democratic National Convention in 1988: "It takes two wings to fly."
Right now, Biden is idling in the cockpit of a political aircraft with one wing.
As chair of the Democratic National Committee at a time when the party's presumptive nominee for president seems likely to crash and burn, you should be openly working to fix the problem rather than merely proclaiming that Biden is a great candidate.
Indications are profuse that Biden is proceeding with a business-as-usual campaign while elevating establishment figures. His rhetorical nods toward Bernie Sanders supporters have been notably superficial, while the nitty-gritty of policy is being placed in corporate hands.
On April 27, The Nation summed up one of the latest ominous signs: "Larry Summers is a dead albatross around Biden's neck. Why should we believe Biden's promises of progressive reforms, when he seeks out the advice of this plutocrat-loving economist?"
I have often heard you talk about the "north star" of party principles. Surely that must involve democracy. Yet the cancellation of the New York presidential primary is a flagrant Machiavellian maneuver by that state's Democratic Party leadership.
"This means that our campaign will receive no delegates from New York, weakening our ability to fight for a progressive platform and progressive rules at the Democratic convention," the Sanders campaign pointed out in a statement on April 29. "It also means our voters are less likely to turn out, which will hurt progressive New York candidates who are still facing primaries." Using the pandemic as an excuse for the cancellation was clearly bogus, since the entire New York election on June 23 could be conducted by mail.
The corrosive ill will created by such machinations--heightening progressives' distrust of the Democratic Party--will weaken support for the Biden general-election campaign across the country. As the Sanders campaign put it, what Democratic Party power brokers did in New York "is an outrage, an assault on democracy."
But where is your voice to challenge this "assault on democracy"? The corporate cats seem to have your tongue. With silence, you're an enabler of this travesty. You should firmly declare that New York will be stripped of all its national-convention delegates unless this decision is reversed and the state's presidential primary is reinstated.
A related situation looms in California and some other states, threatening to deny Sanders his statewide allocation of delegates beyond congressional districts. The threat involves undemocratically depriving Sanders of delegates that he--and millions of people who voted for him--are entitled to. But again, your voice is silent.
You might think it's all well and good for you to claim a "hands off" approach of deferring to decisions by state party leaders. But in mid-March you didn't hesitate to flatly proclaim that Illinois, under a Democratic governor, should go ahead with an in-person presidential primary election, thereby aiding Biden's momentum to widen his delegate lead over Sanders. To the detriment of public health, you publicly and emphatically sought to influence a state decision about a Democratic primary.
But now, your enabling silence is conspicuous as hundreds of duly elected Sanders delegates are in jeopardy nationwide.
As in New York, the bogus pretext in various states is that Sanders is no longer a candidate--even though, when he announced the suspension of his campaign three weeks ago, the senator explicitly stated that "I will stay on the ballot in all remaining states and continue to gather delegates." And, he added, "we must continue working to assemble as many delegates as possible at the Democratic convention, where we will be able to exert significant influence over the party platform and other functions."
The committees and delegates of the national convention will make key decisions on crucial platform issues, such as healthcare as a human right, student debt, immigration reform, institutional racism, the climate emergency, economic justice and much more. Also on the line are major choices about whether the party will democratize or slam the door on internal reforms.
In a mass email that the DNC sent out last weekend, you declared with ample self-congratulation: "Today, the DNC looks massively different than it did in the wake of the 2016 election. That's a good thing. In early 2017, we were rudderless. . . . [I]t was obvious we had to rebuild our party from the ground up." You wrote of "rebuilding trust with Democrats across the country"--and asserted "that is exactly what our new leadership did."
But whatever trust has been rebuilt over the last three years is now being damaged by your refusal, as DNC chair, to speak up for party democracy in the states where it is now under threat.
Biden is a weak candidate in grave danger of losing a decisive number of progressive votes in the fall. Consider the latest polling data that has just appeared under this USA Today headline: "Nearly 1 in 4 Sanders Supporters Not on Board Yet with Voting for Biden."
That's what happens when a presidential campaign is all set to fly with one wing.
Keep ReadingShow Less
As DNC Postpones Milwaukee Convention From July to August, Critics Say 'Absolutely Foolish' to Hold Wisconsin Primary Next Week
"The DNC is delaying a convention that was set to take place in Wisconsin in July. But the Democratic governor and Republican legislature there won't move—or cancel the in-person portion of—a primary that's happening there next Tuesday."
Apr 02, 2020
The Democratic National Convention scheduled for this July in Milwaukee has been pushed back to August due to public health concerns about the coronavirus outbreak even as Wisconsin is forging ahead with plans to have statewide elections--including party primaries--next week on April 7 despite concerns raised by public health officials and voting rights advocates.
"The DNC is delaying a convention that was set to take place in Wisconsin in July," tweeted CNN national political reporter Eric Bradner. "But the Democratic governor and Republican legislature there won't move--or cancel the in-person portion of--a primary that's happening there next Tuesday."
In a statement Thursday, convention CEO Joe Solmonese said he was certain that the show would go on, albeit delayed.
"I'm confident our convention planning team and our partners will find a way to deliver a convention in Milwaukee this summer that places our Democratic nominee on the path to victory in November," said Solmonese.
A DNC official told Politico that the convention would be a more modest affair than recent events given the likely continuation and exacerbation of coronavirus-fueled economic recession.
"People are going to be hurting," the official said. "It's not a time be lavish."
As the New York Times reported, the proposed August rescheduling is hardly more certain to be safe than July as there is no way to predict what stage the pandemic will be at by that point. Former Vice President Joe Biden, who currently enjoys a substantial delegate lead in the presidential primary over his remaining rival Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), on Wednesday night suggested delaying the convention to August would be necessary due to the outbreak.
The Times noted that the coronavirus outbreak has thrown the entire nominating process into chaos, with multiple states postponing their primary elections due to the disease and Sanders maintaining his position in the contest as long as he has a path to victory:
Democratic officials, including Mr. Perez, had hoped that the party would have a nominee by late April, but with so many states postponing their primaries because of public health concerns about the coronavirus, Mr. Biden cannot clinch the nomination until June at the earliest if Mr. Sanders remains in the race.
On Wednesday, Sanders called on Wisconsin to delay its primary election in the interest of public health, as Common Dreams reported.
"People should not be forced to put their lives on the line to vote, which is why 15 states are now following the advice of public health experts and delaying their elections," Sanders said in a statement.
Wisconsin state officials appeared determined Thursday to go ahead with in-person voting despite calls for delay. A coming court ruling on the elections is seen as likely to be in favor of keeping the schedule--but Federal Judge William Conley on Wednesday nonetheless warned public health consequences of the vote could be disastrous and implied the ramifications were on state lawmakers.
"You don't get to go to a federal judge and say (conditions are) impinging on voting rights so you get to stop a statewide election," said Conley. "I'm sorry that's what the situation is, but this is a public health crisis that the state legislature and governor have refused to accept as severe enough to stop this statewide election."
Wisconsin has seen an unprecedented level of requests for mail-in ballots, the state's Elections Commission administrator Meagan Wolfe said Tuesday.
"There's no one place where we're seeing shortages," said Wolfe, "it truly is all across the state."
Thursday is the deadline to request an absentee ballot.
Meanwhile, polling places around Wisconsin are closing--possibly dropping from 31 to four in Green Bay--leaving voters with limited options on where to cast a ballot and presenting a potential crush of people at voting locations at a time when social distancing is most important.
Gov. Tony Evers on Wednesday ordered the National Guard to help at polling places, a move that is still expected be insufficient to meet the needs of the state's election.
"It is anticipated that the assistance of the National Guard will not satisfy all of the current staffing needs," Wisconsin Assistant Attorney General Hannah Jurss told CBS News.
As Vox's Ian Milhiser pointed out Thursday, the Wisconsin election's resolution is still up in the air in light of the pandemic, Conley's expected ruling, and the state's electoral process.
"It is far from clear, in other words, whether the election will happen on Tuesday, how that election will be run, or who will get to decide how the election is run," wrote Milhiser.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Willfully Choosing Not to Listen to Scientists': DNC Chair Tom Perez Under Fire for Urging States to Hold Primaries Despite Coronavirus Crisis
"That Tom Perez is encouraging this, and threatening states who postpone in-person voting, is criminal."
Mar 18, 2020
Ignoring urgent pleas from medical professionals and other health experts to postpone primary elections amid the coronavirus outbreak, Democratic National Committee chairman Tom Perez late Tuesday encouraged states to go ahead with their scheduled contests, claiming "we can in fact have voting and protect our workers, our voters, our candidates."
"I think it's a false choice to suggest we either have to protect safety or protect and ensure our democracy," Perez said in an interview with NPR late Tuesday as voters in Arizona, Florida, and Illinois went to the polls despite widespread calls for a delay. Former Vice President Joe Biden swept all three states.
Perez urged upcoming states to make vote-by-mail available to all voters, but it is unclear whether such a solution could be implemented in short order.
"Deeply disappointed that the DNC is willfully choosing not to listen to scientists during one of the most critical moments in recent history."
--Dr. Lucky Tran
"What you saw in Arizona today, and in Florida, was in Arizona more people voted early than voted in the entirety of the Democratic primary in 2016," Perez said.
In a statement earlier Tuesday, Perez critized Ohio's widely praised decision to delay its presidential primary, asserting that it "only bred more chaos and confusion."
Critics argued that Perez's position runs counter to the recommendations of scientists--as well as the federal government--and could put countless lives at risk.
"Deeply disappointed that the DNC is willfully choosing not to listen to scientists during one of the most critical moments in recent history," tweeted biologist Dr. Lucky Tran.
Pointing to a video of an elderly Illinois resident voicing alarm Tuesday about conditions at her polling site--where she said hundreds of people, including vulnerable seniors, were gathered in a room for hours at a time--The Intercept's Ryan Grim ripped Perez for permitting such a potentially disastrous situation.
"That Tom Perez is encouraging this, and threatening states who postpone in-person voting, is criminal," Grim tweeted, referring to a DNC memo sent last Wednesday warning that states could face a "delegate penalty" if they push back their scheduled elections.
"It's not out of the question that when this is over there could be demands for prosecutions of those who knowingly did this," Grim said.
Puerto Rico is set to hold its Democratic presidential primary on March 29, followed by contests on April 4 in Alaska, Hawaii, and Wyoming.
Ahead of Tuesday's primaries, more than 1,600 people--including at least 100 medical professionals--signed an open letter demanding that the DNC and secretaries of state to delay primary contests until at least May, a move that would allow states to implement alternatives to in-person voting if needed.
"By postponing primaries, state governments will be able to keep resources focused, and they will not need to worry about the distraction of running primaries while responding to this pandemic," the letter reads. "This will also give time for the states to implement alternative voting mechanisms, such as vote-by-mail, at a sufficient scale if the pandemic continues to be an emergency for these states."
"As people are understandably avoiding public places and crowds, we expect turnout to be depressed. Rescheduling the primaries would ensure that more people are allowed to exercise their right to vote without fear," the letter continues. "For the health of our fellow citizens and our democracy, please act now to postpone the upcoming March primaries until May."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'In Law School They Called This Conflict of Interest': Tlaib Objects to Paid Bloomberg Staffers on DNC Committees
"Out of tens of millions of qualified people, Tom Perez's DNC is seating two Bloomberg campaign surrogates on bodies that can propose changes."
Feb 05, 2020
Rep. Rashida Tlaib accused two members of the Democratic National Committee's rules committees of having a conflict of interest following reports that they are paid staffers of the presidential campaign billionaire Michael Bloomberg, the former mayor of New York City.
The Michigan Democrat tweeted a link late Wednesday to a report by Sludge regarding the recent appointments of Alexandra Rooker, vice chair of the California Democratic Party, to the DNC's Rules Committee, and former Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter to the Standing Rules and Bylaws Committee.
Both panels can propose rule changes to the Democratic nominating process, and both Rooker and Nutter began working on Bloomberg's campaign in recent weeks, advising him on policy and other campaign issues.
"Out of tens of millions of qualified people, Tom Perez's DNC is seating two Bloomberg campaign surrogates" on the committees, tweeted David Moore, who wrote for Sludge Wednesday about the appointments.
"In law school, they called this a conflict of interest," wrote Tlaib, a surrogate for Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) in the Democratic race.
The Sludge report came a week after the DNC announced it was amending debate rules to eliminate a requirement for a minimum number of individual donors--a change that could allow Bloomberg to participate in the debate coming up on February 19.
That rule change came directly from Perez, members of the Standing Rules and Bylaws Committee told Sludge--but that panel and the committee Rooker is serving on could make more changes as the primary continues.
The elimination of the fundraising requirement was also announced after Bloomberg donated $320,000 to the DNC in November, as well as $800,000 to a joint PAC that raises funds for the DNC and state Democratic parties.
The change favoring Bloomberg angered some DNC members including Arab American Institute president James Zogby, who told Sludge, "I've been telling people: do not say the DNC decided this, because we did not."
"If I were Cory Booker or Julian Castro, I'd be really pissed right now," Zogby added, referring to the candidates who dropped out of the race in the weeks before the rules change was announced.
In addition to the debate rule that has already been changed, Politico reported last weekend that some DNC members were privately plotting to change other rules, including the manner in which delegates are counted at the party's national convention.
Nomiki Konst, a surrogate for Sanders, applauded Tlaib for calling attention to Bloomberg's paid advisers' membership on the committees--two years after the DNC objected to reforms banning conflicts of interest.
"Let's be clear: all corruption leads to conflicts of interests and lack of oversight," tweeted Konst. "Good on Rashida Tlaib for calling it out!"
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Beyond Absurd': DNC Chair Tom Perez Demands 'Recanvass' of Iowa Caucus Before Results Fully Reported
"The timing of this (right as Sanders is likely going to be declared a victor both on delegates and the popular vote) could not possibly be more suspicious."
Feb 05, 2020
This is a developing news story... Check back for possible updates...
Throwing yet another wrench into the endlessly disastrous Iowa caucus process, Democratic National Committee chairman Tom Perez on Thursday demanded an immediate "recanvass" of the vote even before the results have been fully reported by the Iowa Democratic Party.
"Enough is enough," Perez tweeted. "In light of the problems that have emerged in the implementation of the delegate selection plan and in order to assure public confidence in the results, I am calling on the Iowa Democratic Party to immediately begin a recanvass."
In a follow-up tweet sent 40 minutes later, Perez wrote: "A recanvass is a review of the worksheets from each caucus site to ensure accuracy. The [Iowa Democratic Party] will continue to report results."
The announcement by Perez, who has faced growing calls to resign since Monday night, sparked further confusion and outrage, particularly among supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).
"Let me see if I understand this," tweeted Sanders backer Shaun King. "Ninety-seven percent of the votes are counted. Bernie surges and is about to take the lead in delegates. Tom Perez calls for something called a 'recanvass.'"
As Common Dreams reported, a new batch of Iowa caucus results released early Thursday morning showed Sanders extending his popular vote lead over Pete Buttigieg to more than 2,500 votes and moving into a virtual tie in state delegate equivalents (SDEs). As the results stand, Sanders and Buttigieg are expected to emerge from the bungled, error-riddled process with the same number of national delegates.
Ryan Cooper, columnist for The Week, wrote in response to Perez's demand that "the timing of this (right as Sanders is likely going to be declared a victor both on delegates and the popular vote) could not possibly be more suspicious."
Tyler Pager, political correspondent for Bloomberg News, reported Thursday afternoon that the Buttigieg campaign was in touch with Democratic Party officials in Iowa earlier in the day and raised issues about how SDEs were being calculated. In response to that reporting, The Intercept's Ryan Grim--who has also been tracking the developments closely--tweeted:
Part of the reference in Grim's tweet is that it was a complaint filed by the Buttigieg campaign last week that led to the Des Moines Register and CNN from deciding not to release their joint pre-caucus poll in Iowa.
Grim also responded to other indications that Perez is pressing for a recount specifically due to how well Sanders is fairing in the tabulation of satellite caucuses--a dynamic he said that, if true, would be nothing less than "corrupt":
CNN's Jeff Zeleny, citing two anonymous people familiar with the matter, reported that the Iowa Democratic Party was not given advance notice of Perez's demand for a recount.
"Perez doesn't point out that the DNC has been running the show in Iowa for the last 48 hours," Zeleny tweeted.
Asked about Perez's call for a recanvass during a press conference in New Hampshire Thursday, Sanders emphasized that he won the popular vote in the Iowa caucus and said "that is not going to be changed."
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy