Democracy for New Mexico

Sound Off: Reaction to Open Letter to State Dem Chair

This Soundoff was submitted by V. Lamkin of Albuquerque in response to a previous Sound Off by Guy Watson entitled Open Letter to Dem State Party Chair:

I attended the March 4, 2006 State Resolutions/Platform Committee meeting with Mr. Watson and a handful of others who came to voice concerns and ideas to the committee members. One aspect of this meeting that stands out for me was the resistance by some of the committee members to even entertain issues that they perceived as "wedge issues." In other words: any issue that might be used by the Republicans against the NM Democratic Party.

During the course of this meeting we were given a chance to participate as long as we submitted our ideas in writing after each section of the platform was discussed by the committee members present. I myself am new to how the platform process works. I submitted several ideas that day in writing and they were included on the platform that was presented to the delegates on Saturday March 18, 2006. I learned a great deal from observing this process and I encourage others to become familiar with it. As the meeting started we were given several packets of resolutions that had been submitted to the committee from around the state. I did not have a lot of time once the meeting started to read all this information.

The day was spent discussing a platform that I thought was a compilation of the resolutions in the various packets. I found out afterwards that the platform discussed on March 4, 2006 was a version of the 1996 platform. I became more alarmed when I had a chance to read the submitted resolutions packets after the meeting and realized that many of the "whereas" that had been adopted from around the state had not even been considered or discussed by the committee on March 4.

There were many wonderful and courageous resolutions submitted that were not taken into consideration. Here are just a few:

Santa Fe presented a resolution that contrasted minimum wage workers and CEO pay. They made a great point about the suppression of local economic growth versus wine and dining of special interest lobbyists. Also the State Central Committee submitted 15 resolution pages under a wide-range of headings. Just to name a few: Profiteering from War, Fairness to the National Guard, the FCC and Reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine, Predatory Lending and Payday Loans, and Resolutions to Bring Home the Troops. Rio Arriba submitted a resolution focused upon forbidding the buying and selling of votes.

I haven't even touched base with some of the incredible specific language that was submitted: Los Alamos submitted wording such as: the invasion of Iraq was based upon a false claim, Marriage is an institution that recognizes the lifetime commitment of two people and marriage is an institution that guarantees two people legal and economic rights not available to single people. They also submitted one urging congress to create a Department of Peace. Lincoln County submitted many resolutions focused upon Volunteer First Responders and providing them with Worker's Compensation Insurance etc.... In our state's rural areas most, if not all of the firefighters and EMT's are volunteers. Lincoln County also addressed the drought our state is experiencing with resolutions focused upon groundwater sustainability.

Do you find the above resolutions as compelling as I do? Why were these resolutions and all the rest not considered for inclusion on the platform during the March 4, 2006 meeting? I know this means spending more than one day on them but I feel this effort should have been made. Let me be very clear here. My intent is not to attack the committee members. I appreciate that these members of the Democratic Party have stepped up to the plate and volunteered their valuable time. I just feel the process has room for improvement. During this past Friday's meeting at Smith-Brasher Hall when Mel O'Reilly stated from the floor that more Democrats should get involved in the process -- I agreed with him wholeheartedly.

I among others attended the March 18, 2006 preprimary convention in order to fight for the concept that if we have a resolution adoption process then these resolutions should be included on the platform that is being voted upon. Whether they be mainstream or "wedge issues," if we insure this then we truly all are a part of a party that is inclusive.

In conclusion, I feel if we want more of a say in what is included on the platform -- so it is truly our platform -- then more of us need to take a stand and participate in the meetings where these decisions are made.

V. Lamkin
Albuquerque, NM

Editor's Note: Sound Off is an occasional feature on this blog that provides an opportunity for folks to express their opinons in a longer format than thread comments permit. If you'd like to submit a Sound Off for future publication, please send it to me by clicking on the Email Me link on the upper left-hand side of the main page.

DPBC Third Thursday Meeting Today

From the Democratic Party of Bernalillo County:
THIS MONTH ONLY: THIRD THURSDAY MEETING MOVED TO THURSDAY, MARCH 23, AT UNM LAW SCHOOL, ROOM 2401, 6:00 PM. All Democrats welcome.

Topic: "A Critical Issue - Do We Really Have Enough Water?" We have a record drought that affects both our metropolitan and rural areas in New Mexico. Come to our meeting to hear: Janet Jarratt, Vice Chair, Middle Rio Grande ESA Collaborative and John Shipley: Member, Board of Directors of Rio Grande Agricultural Land Trust. Everyone is invited to share perspectives and ask questions. Click for map.

Victory for NM Dem Native American Caucus

A rule change that allowed an official Native American Caucus to be created within the Democratic Party of NM passed unanimously at Friday's State Central Committee Meeting. An article by Erny Zah in the The Daily Times of Farmington provides good coverage on this important achievement. Excerpts:

"It's a good thing," said GloJean Todacheene, a state committee member and vice president of Shiprock Chapter. "It's a darn good thing."

... With the committee's approval of amendments to the state bylaws to include a Native American Caucus, New Mexico becomes the second state in the country to have the Democratic Party recognize Native Americans with a caucus. The first state to have a Native American Caucus was California, which established it in 1998.

... For New Mexico, Harris said that the approval of the caucus validates the role Native Americans have in the party. She said Natives account for about 10 percent of the state's population, and about 16 percent of the Democratic vote. In addition, about 75 percent of registered Native voters are Democrat.

"One of the ideas we hear that is usually true is Native Americans are taken for granted as a base group," said Harris, who is Comanche.

Now that Native Americans are a viable party within the party, she said that will open doors for Natives for funding that include helping get Natives registered to vote and for training for Natives so they can become more involved with campaigns as volunteers and candidates.

"That's important because of tribal sovereignty," she about that role of Natives in the political process.

... Even though the State Central Committee unanimously approved the formation of a Native American Caucus, Natives are still vastly under represented on the state committee. Of the 357 people on the state committee, only four members are Native American.

Linda Yardley, a State Central Committee member, said she believed going into the vote for approval of the caucus that Native Americans were "overlooked and neglected" by the Democratic Party.

Harris said Native Americans have "caught up pretty quick" with the rest of the party since they have only had the right to vote in state elections since 1962. Now Harris hopes the number of Native Americans holding office will begin to be more reflective of the percentage of Native Americans in the state.

"There's not enough Native American's running for office," she said. She said there are reasons why Native's have been under represented.

"We have been building ourselves. We have been in survival mode for so long. It's just now we can look beyond mere survival," she said.

There will also be increased voter outreach to tribal populations in the state by the Democratic Party of NM's field director, Anathea Chino. Anathea is one of four new field organizers in NM paid by the DNC to do Party building and outreach, and is from Acoma Pueblo, west of Albuquerque. She'll be concentrating on San Juan, McKinley, Sandoval, Cibola, Valencia, Torrance, and Lincoln Counties with an emphasis on the Native American communities throughout the state.

Impeachment and More: What We Won at NM Dem Weekend Meetings

UPDATE 3/22/06: Today's right-wing Drudge Report features a link to this Santa Fe New Mexican article on the Bush impeachment resolution passed at Saturday's Democratic Pre-Primary Convention. I guess we've hit the big time, big time. NM Dems: Out in front of the pack and calling attention nationwide to the abuses of power perpetrated by the Bush administration. You can comment on the New Mexican story here.
**********************

Despite the ruckesses described in previous posts here, we won some big battles at the NM Democratic Party SCC Meeting Friday and Pre-Primary Convention Saturday. You can see one of them depicted on the front page of today's Albuquerque Journal above. A copyrighted story  by Journal political writer Jeff Jones, describes passage of a floor amendment to the Party platform introduced by Bernalillo County delegate Robb Chavez that says:

...the Democratic Party of New Mexico supports the impeachment of George Bush and his lawful removal from office.

Since this was a floor amendment, it had to pass by at least a margin of 2/3 of the delegates. In the article, NM Democratic Party Chair John Wertheim is quoted as saying

"It was probably 80/20" in favor of the resolution. "There was not a single person to speak in opposition."

In another excerpt, Chairman Wertheim continues:

Realistically, "impeachment is not going to happen while we have a Republican Congress." But he said the resolution shows "there's widespread sentiment among Democrats that the Bush administration has been fraught with abuse of power -- and a greater degree of violations than anything the Clinton administration did."

Above: Dallas Timmons at the Convention mic proposing a floor amendment.

In addition, Dallas Timmons, another delegate from Bernalillo County, who's also an SCC member, introduced this amendment to the platform, which also passed by a large margin:

We believe the United States should abide by the Geneva Convention on all issues of conduct of war and prevent the U.S. military and our nation's intelligence agencies from utilizing torture of prisoners or detainees in any manner or at any time whatsoever.

It's telling that if an amendment or motion from the floor was allowed to be introduced by the Chair, it generally passed by a large margin, sometimes almost unanimously. What does this mean? That the Democratic Convention delegates are definitely from the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party, oftentimes way ahead of elected officials on timely and crtitical issues.

Above: Jeff Armijo, who got 70% of the delegate vote for State Auditor, rounding up votes at Friday's SCC Meeting. He passed out stickers that said, 'You Matter.' And we do.

In addition to wins at the Convention, we also had some significant successes at the SCC Meeting on Friday. SCC member Bill Kass of Bernalillo County introduced a motion to require the Party to create a budget committee to help plan and oversee the Party's financial dealings. Ann Dunlap, another SCC member from Bernalillo County, introduced a motion requiring the Party to institute a regular audit process of its books. Both passed almost unanimously.

Also Friday, SCC members passed a State Rules Committee report that included requiring that each of our three congressional districts be represented in appointments to the Rules Committee, and that changed the Party bylaws to allow the creation of a Native American Caucus within the Party.

What do these successes show? If the Dem grassroots keeps at it, has the gumption to introduce business from the floor at meetings and learns to do it properly by studying the intricacies of Roberts' Rules of Order, members and delegates are often quite receptive and generally vote to approve the measures.

At this weekend's meetings, almost every motion or resolution from grassroots Dems that managed to make its way to the floor was approved by a wide margin. You can see why there's been an ongoing effort in some quarters to quash floor motions and resolutions before they get to the floor. A number of additional platform planks, including ones on equal rights for all and banning weapons in space, would no doubt have passed if they had been allowed by the Chair to reach the floor. Unlike some of our candidates and officeholders, rank and file Dems are ready to rumble and to confront the right-wing noise machine head on. If not now, when?  As legendary Democrat, President Franklin Roosevelt, once said, "The only thing we have to fear is -- fear itself."

There's a movement afoot among Dems of many stripes. It has to do with fighting for what we believe in. With speaking truth to power. With saying what we mean. With fearlessly persuading, educating and leading on issues where voters have heard only the argument of the right-wing cabal. As the badges worn by a number of Dems at this weekend's meetings said:

"I'm a Murtha - Feingold Democrat. Are You?"

Wake Up: 2006 is a Base Election

The recommended reading of the day is provided by Matt Stoller of MyDD. Think about it in terms of the battle the grassroots is having with NM Dem Party officers and insiders about the watered down, weakly written 2006 Platform. And how an effort to replace it with the actual resolutions that traveled up the committee structure and had previously been approved by the State Central Committee, was stymied out of fear of being too "controversial." The base here definitely isn't happy. Not a good thing if you're a Dem candidate. They've got to give people something to fight for, don't they?

Sound Off: Open Letter to State Dem Party Chair

This letter is from Guy Watson, Democratic Precinct Chair and Pre-Primary Convention Delegate. He sent it directly to Mr. Wertheim and others as well.

To: John V. Wertheim, Democratic Party of New Mexico Chairman.

I am a Democratic Precinct Chairperson and was a delegate to today's Democratic Party of New Mexico Pre-Primary Nominating Convention.  During the discussion on the NM Democratic Party Platform you used a parliamentary maneuver to first table a delegate's amendment to the platform and then, when the Chair of the Platform committee refused to cut off the discussion you asked another  member of the Platform Committee to go to the mike and call for the vote on the main motion, a non debatable motion. This action assured there would be no discussion of the tabled amendment.You then called for a vote of the delegates to accept the platform thus killing the tabled amendment.  The amendment presented by Mr. Riley was a request to substitute the more specific and shorter wording of the twice passed Resolutions for the poorly worded and vague misstatement of the document arrived at during the Platform Committee's March meeting. Your maneuver effectively cut out an open  discussion of interest to at least half of the delegates.

I was an observer and participant in the March Platform Meeting. The wording agreed upon at that meeting is not the wording or the content that was today made the Platform of the NM Democratic Party. Following the Platform meeting in early March you or a member of the Platform committee rewrote the platform into an almost apologetic statement of vague "memories" of the original intent of the Resolutions voted on and approved in April 2005 and November 2005. As soon as you tabled the amendment delegates sitting around me made numerous disparaging comments to the effect that you can be counted on to shove through your view over the views of the rank and file Democrats.

I am angry that you refused to allow a vote on the amendment. I'm embarrassed that you reinforced a belief that the grass roots work by volunteers in the party is less important than the agenda of the State Central Committee's Chairperson. I was given a sticker to wear during the convention that said "You Matter". Observing your control over the Platform discussion today convinces me that the sticker is wishful thinking.

Guy Watson, Ed.D, Albuquerque, NM
Email: drguy@qwest.net

Editor's Note: An earlier blog post covered problems with other aspects of the Party's platform process. Sound Off is an occasional feature on DFNM. If you'd like to submit a post for this series, please email me by clicking on the link in the upper left-hand side of this page. We encourage your participation.

NM Dem Convention Primary Results

I'll have more about this weekend's Democratic Party SCC Meeting and Pre-Primary Convention in Albuquerque, but I'm down with a bug right now. I did want to get the numbers up today for primary candidates, however. According to the Albuquerque Journal, here's how the primary race voting in contested races went with Democratic Party Pre-Primary Convention Delegates yesterday:

UPDATE 1:34 PM: I've amended the percentages based on info provided by the DPBC.

Attorney General:
35.95%  Geno Zamora
32.70%  Lemuel Martinez
31.34%  Gary King

Secretary of State:
34.09%  Mary Herrera
33.48%  Stephanie Gonzales
21.14%  Shirley Hooper
11.29%  Letitia Montoya

Land Commissioner:
74.12%  Ray Powell Jr.
25.88%  Jim Baca

State Auditor:
69.98%  Jeff Armijo
30.02%  Ray Buckman

Winners in uncontested races: Jeff Bingman, U.S. Senator; Patricia Madrid, U.S. House CD1; Albert Kissling, U.S. House CD2; Tom Udall, U.S. House CD3; Bill Richardson, Governor; Diane Denish, Lt. Governor; James Lewis, State Treasurer.

To get on the primary election ballot without having to get additional signatures, candidates had to receive at least 20% of delegate votes. The order of the candidates on the ballot for the Democratic Primary Election on June 6, 2006, will be determined by the number of votes received from delegates in contested primary races. Whoever got the most delegate votes will be at the top of the ticket for that race.

Continuing Hullabaloo: State Dem Platform Process

More on the controversy about the State Democratic Party's platform process at New Mexico Matters, and followed up at Live From Silver City here (Part I) and  here (Part II). Wedges, wedges!

Meanwhile, the release of the NM Party's proposed platform for 2006 has prompted criticism about its mushiness and avoidance of controversy. Clearly the 2006 platform mimics the one produced in 1996, in both content and format. You might think many issues and positions would have changed significantly in ten years' time, but you'd be mistaken. Virtually eliminated from the platform were a significant number of specific positions passed by large margins in the form of dozens of resolutions approved by County Parties and the State Central Committee over the past year or so. The proposed DPNM platform will be voted on at the State Pre-Primary Convention this Saturday. Normally, the platform passes without much discussion, but this year may well be different with many Dems up at arms about the Party's lack of backbone on major issues.

The Process that Produced the Platform: A motion was duly passed at the November SCC meeting directing the Party to hold platform hearings in each congressional district, as the Party bylaws require, and a day-long platform meeting the day before the Spring SCC meeting. The motion was aimed at involving as many Dems as possible in the process and providing opportunities for those charged with writing the platform to hear what rank and file Democrats believe on the issues.

Unfortunately, the result instead was a truncated process that produced mostly bland platitudes. I guess it's not surprising considering the platform was produced by only a handful of committee members and others at a meeting in Albuquerque on the same day as the Taos County convention. Moreover, although Party officials termed the meeting "statewide," I heard about it only because a committee member shared their email with me. Not exactly what the SCC-passed motion required.

Could it be that the weak platform process is really designed to be that way -- to keep the street urchins of the Party quiet while "moderates" decide on positions based mostly on the lastest polling results?

Take two examples. By overwhelming margins, a significant number of County Parties passed very similar resolutions on the Iraq War and a strong resolution on this passed almost unanimously at the State Resolutions Committee and before the SCC:

Resolution: Support our troops. Oppose the continued military occupation of Iraq, and urge the government of the United States of America to plan immediately for the withdrawal of its military forces from Iraq, specify a target date for the completion of the withdrawal which is no later than June 2006, initiate the withdrawal process as soon as possible to signal our good intentions and announce that the U.S. has no plans for a long-term presence in Iraq, except for that associated with normal diplomatic relations between countries.

Yet, the 2006 platform states only:

Platform: We support the strategic redeployment of troops from Iraq, in 2006, if possible. We believe that this country should use more diplomacy, as a deterrent to future wars.

Regarding civil rights for GLBT citizens, the 2006 platform says only

Platform: The Democratic Party recognizes that families and communities come in all shapes and sizes. We believe that government should not dictate family values, but rather value all families equally.

All discrimination must be eliminated in housing, employment and public services; including discrimination based on race, religion, mental and physical disability, national origin, age, sexual orientation, or gender identity.

However, both the State Resolutions Committee and the SCC passed resolutions with this language:

Resolution: Oppose any definition of civil marriage that restricts eligibility based on sexual orientation. Also the State Democratic Party will work to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act and support the right of all citizens to civil marriage.

Resolution: Support the rights of all citizens to be treated equally under the law by supporting legislation which guarantees every citizen equal rights, regardless of their sexual preference and by supporting legislation which outlaws discrimination against persons on the basis of their sexual preference.

What happened between the passage of these resolutions and the writing of the platform? Imposed mushiness from those apparently so scared of the neo-con and Christian right that they prefer weasling over clarity and specificity. Haven't you heard? If the Party stands up for equal rights for ALL citizens and for bringing the troops home, the right-wing noise machine will kick into high gear and label the Dems "extremists." Sorry, but the voters already know the Dem Party is full of people strong on civil rights and against this war.

What will voters learn from watered down platform planks? That Dems don't believe strongly enough in their values to take an honest, principled stand. Our fear and gutlessness will be out there for all to see. Since we're already called "extremists," why not take the strong stands we believe in and fight for our values? Why not persuade, educate and lead on the issues? What do we have to lose?

If we can't have our candidates run on a strong, passionate and courageous platform now, with BushCo's approval ratings hovering in the low 30s and a majority of the public against the war, when can we do it? As has been said at virtually every Dem gathering I've attended, and on millions of places all over the web, we need more passionate patriots and fewer meek apologists. And we need them NOW. Let's beef up the platform and run on what's right, not what's status quo.

Video of the Day

This one fits right in with all the kvetching about the Democratic Party and its message or lack of. Click for , courtesy of One Good Move. (A nod to John for this one.) After laughing at that go read here and weep. By the way, Senator Tom Harkin (who was a Dean supporter in the last presidential election cycle) has signed on as a co-sponsor of Sen. Feingold's Censure Resolution. If you'd like to thank him, go here.

Meet the Candidates This Thursday

From the Democratic Party of Bernalillo County:
The Democratic Party of Bernalillo County is hosting an evening dedicated to our Pre-Primary Convention Delegates getting to know the candidates and all other interested Democrats.  It will be held on Thursday, March 16th from 6:30 PM until 8:30 PM.  We are offering fun and information, no speeches, just a social evening where your candidates will have a chance to answer questions and convince you to vote for them  It will be held at Plumber's Hall - 510 San Pedro SE.  We hope that you will be there!!!! All Democrats are welcome.

Terri Holland, Executive Director
Democratic Party of Bernalillo County
O-505-256-1855