LESSONS FROM THE ELECTION OF 2012 - NO REST FOR THE WINNERS

The first lesson liberals need to learn from the election of 2012 is that the battles are never over. The re-election of President Obama, the retention of the United States Senate and the increased Democratic presence in the House of Representatives does not mean that the Tea Party, the Libertarians and the Republican Party are in decline.  In 1964 with the incredible landslide re-election of President Johnson progressives prognosticated the demise of the Republican Party.  Four years later the Republicans took the White House and twelve years after that the Reagan Revolution began the war on the New Deal.  In 1936 the Republicans suffered their worst defeat since the Civil War - they didn’t go away.

Today the battles for gender equality, racial equality, women’s rights, voting rights, and governmental commitment to raising the standard of living of the poor and the elderly are still going on with strenuous efforts by a coalition of conservatives, Luddites and No-Nothings to repeal the twentieth century and return our country to the days of the Robber Barons immediately following the Civil War.

Women are being lulled to sleep with the deserved dream and hope that in 2016 the first woman will be elected President.  And, if Hillary Clinton runs that will most likely be the case.  But if she does not run what will women have done in 2013, 2014 and 2015 to increase the number of women in elected public office and the potential candidates for the nation's highest office in future Presidential elections.

This requires activity and commitment at every level.  In my communities, where I lead the local Democratic committee, we are running nine municipal and school board candidates and seven are women.  In the county I live in, Delaware County, Pennsylvania the most activity at the county level can be found in the Women’s Democratic Club and among the women elected officials.

While too many women wait for 2016 the yahoos in the states like North Dakota pass laws that will effectively negate Roe v. Wade and eliminate a woman’s right to determine all aspects of her reproductive health. 

While the nation focuses on the Supreme Court and the march toward marriage equality, (which when won will be another battle that will not end) Republican controlled states are passing laws for the express purpose of suppressing the constitutional equal protection of voters and reversing two hundred years of franchise expansion by substituting restrictions to make it more difficult and a more onerous task to vote.   These plots didn’t work in 2012 - but repeated every year they may stop resulting in backlash and result in apathetic compliance.

Democracy by its very nature means change can happen.  It also means that change can be undone and that generations that do not remember the reasons for change (for example the Great Depression leading to the New Deal programs to ameliorate the economic consequences of that catastrophe) may in fact support in the name of change undoing the earlier change (for example privatizing Social Security because today's generation doesn’t remember a time when the older folks had no income after retirement (didn’t have much retirement either.)

The battle for equal rights for African Americans was won in the 1960's but it is now being fought again.  It was first won in the 1860's and then lost in the 1880's.  It could be lost again.

The battle for equal rights for women was won in the 1970's with major court decisions.  Equal rights chipped away at become unequal treatment.  And that could happen now.

 In 1796 the Federalists revised the immigration laws to increase the number of years needed to become naturalized citizen form four to fourteen because the Europeans coming over in that decade were voting for the Jeffersonians.  Now there is a solid effort of the national Republican Party to prevent a path to citizenship for the twelve million undocumented residents in our country because that party believes that these persons wouldn’t vote for them.  (Personally I think they would have a better chance getting Latino votes if they treated them like first class citizens and passed comprehensive immigration reform)

Marriage Equality looks to be the great social reform of this decade and those of our citizens who find personal fulfillment in the love and commitment of someone of the same sex will have equal treatment with all others.  But it will become the next battle and will last as long as Democracy lasts.  Those opposed to marriage equality will continue to battle.  And if they see the equal rights won in the 60's, 70's and 80's undone they will be encouraged to fight to undo LGBT rights.

If anyone personified the political battles, often around social issues, of the decades between 1960 and 2010 it was the Senator from Massachusetts Edward M. Kennedy.  As he ended his quest for the Presidency in 1980, at a national Democratic convention I attended, he rallied the liberals of the party by reminding them that the cause endures and the dream never dies.  He also sounded the warning trumpet when he said “the work goes on”.

2 April 2013

Ed Koch The First "America's Mayor" I Knew.

During my career in politics in two states I’ve had the pleasure of working with two of America’s most effective and famous Mayors.  Ed Koch of New York City and Ed Rendell of Philadelphia, both of whom were born in the Bronx, a borough of NYC, but were raised and built their political careers elsewhere.  Both consummate political campaigners and they became the recognized symbols of their cities during the years they served. And, both were, while loyal Democrats, independent in their approach to government and willing to work with and sometimes assist officials from the other political party.

I met Ed Koch when he first ran for Mayor of New York City in 1977.  As a newly serving state assemblyman I stayed out of the fractious Democratic primary but when it resulted in a two person run-off I endorsed Koch.  He was an indefatigable campaigner.  He would walk into stores and shake hands with the customers.  He loved beauty parlors and the women sitting under their hair dryers were always both amazed and pleased.  He would enter a bank, especially on social security check day when there were lines for the tellers and he would shout out “This isn’t a hold up. It’s me Ed Koch and I’m running for Mayor.”  People loved it.  

I missed two opportunities to campaign with Koch.  Once in the summer of 1977 it was 104 degrees and he was going to walk the commercial strip of my home neighborhood - a fifteen block strip with no trees or shade.  I couldn’t do it.  He did.  And the second time was when after the primary I and a group of other leaders were preparing to endorse him for the run-off. Since his run-off opponent was from Queens he much wanted me there.  And I came for the press conference.  However my first daughter had just been born and I had a limited time to get back to the hospital.  Koch was late so I had to leave and get back to the hospital.  He was gracious enough to send flowers and always thereafter asked after her. 

Whenever I faced a primary contest he was always there to campaign for me.  As Mayor he was often irascible, he was sometimes infuriating, but, he was always independent. He kept his word when we differed he often tried to compromise. Once he asked Gov. Cuomo to veto a bill I had sponsored which was of tremendous importance to my neighborhood.  Cuomo obliged but said he would sign it the next year unless the Mayor compromised.  His staff wouldn't give in so we re-passed it and Cuomo signed it. At that point the Mayor sent a letter to my constituents saying I had passed the bill they wanted and done a great job for them.  He was in a word known to New Yorkers of all backgrounds a Mensch.

Once when we were campaigning in Astoria I told him he should take the show on the road and run for Governor.  He said “they’d never accept me upstate” Unfortunately, he didn’t listen to his own instincts; and, though almost the entire party establishment supported him he lost the gubernatorial primary to Mario Cuomo the man he had beaten in the Mayoral run-off.  Koch often joked that he was the only candidate who was 120 points ahead in the polls and then lost. He served twelve years as Mayor of New York City losing his fourth primary contest in 1989.

I had moved from NYC in 1987 to Delaware Co. PA.   Not living in Philadelphia all I knew of Ed Rendell was what I saw on the television news.  Until he ran for Governor and as Delaware County Democratic chairman I supported him for the party nomination.  Despite the long held belief that a Philadelphian couldn’t win statewide, Rendell did.  He defeated the front runner in the primary and then went on to win the general election against the Republican who was expected to beat the Philly Mayor.  He took his show on the road and the folks throughout the state reacted as did those in the suburbs - they loved him.  I remember his first foray into Nether Providence in our county at a house party where he told the assembled guests (none really active in politics) that as Mayor of Philadelphia he had visited a school in Tinicum (in our county not the city) and read to the school children.  The media dubbed him America’s Mayor he certainly was seen by the voters as Pennsylvania’s Mayor.

When Obama ran for President in 2008, Ed Koch offered to be a surrogate speaker. He came to Martin’s Run in Broomall to speak to a mostly Jewish audience about why they had nothing to worry about in Obama as President.  I saw him there and introduced him to the crowd.  He needed no introduction.  They all knew who he was and he did his usual stand-up terrific job. I’ve often thought that if I had the privilege of introducing Ed Rendell to a New York audience the same would be true - they would know who he was and he’d do a swell job. 

Ed Koch and Ed Rendell two Jewish boys who were born in the Bronx and then rose to be the symbols of the cities they grew up in and served for so long.  Neither was ever seen as a Jewish candidate. Both in their way transcended ethnicity and both surpassed partisanship. I knew one and know the other and campaigned for both. 

1 Feb. 2013

CURING THE ILLS OF DEMOCRACY

Al Smith is one of those credited with having said “The cure for the ills of democracy is more democracy”.  As a democrat (with a little d) I certainly hold to that philosophical statement. Democracy in America was under attack this past year of 2012 and in my opinion won most, not all the battles, and is still winning the war.  There are those who would replace our democratic republic with an oligarchy of the rich, a plutocracy of the 1% with the other 99% basically doing their bidding.  Our Senators today are either millionaires or owned by millionaires and many of our Representatives are in the millionaire category.

Unfortunately discussion of government structure and processes, administrative and election law is among that which engenders the least interest among our people.  Only when rulers threaten to tax their favorite beverage (tea in 1773 or soda in NYC in 2012) do people begin to focus on the power of government and the rules that put the governed in office.   More democracy does not promise nirvana nor paradise but it just might preserve this republic for another hundred years and give my grandchildren and their grandchildren a free and prosperous country to live in.

There are a number of democratic reforms we need to enact to preserve popular democracy.  We need to abolish the Electoral College and elect the nation’s President by direct popular vote.  Doing that will among other things reduce the temptation of some politicians to play with the electoral college rules in their state (as State Sen. Pileggi is determined to do in Penn) to favor one party over the other.  Direct popular vole will strengthen the President’s position as spokesman and leader of the nation both home and abroad.

We need to revamp our voter registration laws.  If in fact the American people want photo id presented whenever a voter votes than why not institute same day registration using the photo id rather than a two step process of registration pre voting and needing id on two occasions. If the supporters of photo voter id are sincere they should support same day registration as the logical extension of their plan.  Photo id required of already registered voters is just an attempt to suppress turnout of minorities, young people and the very old who most often lack photo id.

I served in the New York State Assembly for eight years.  I strongly support term limits for all elected officials.  What seems fair and workable are two terms for most executive officers and six terms for 2 yr legislators (3 terms for 4 or 6 year legislators.  The idea behind a citizen legislature was not to make these positions career jobs but to have citizens representative of the population acting on the laws that govern the people.

It’s time get serious about a form of re-re-districting, if we are going to elect our representatives by district, which prevents political gerrymandering.  One possibility is using existing county and municipal lines and letting legislators cast a weighted vote based on the population.  The boundaries of our counties and municipalities were set many decades and in some cases centuries ago with no reference to Democrat or Republican strength.  The weighted vote would accomplish the objective of one many one vote and using existing boundaries would allow for district representation so people could relate to their individual representative.

The U S Senate needs to stop acting like a millionaire's downtown club and become the people's second house that was envisaged when the constitution was amended to provide for direct popular election of Senators.  The filibuster needs to be abolished and majority rule allowed to govern the Senate with the rights of the minority on a given issue to offer amendments and engage in some debate.  But except in the cases the constitution provided for e.g. treaties no super majority of more than 51 should be required to enact legislation for the country.

There are other reforms at local, state and national level that should be implemented to open up our governmental processes and encourage more people to participate, e.g. universal ballot access.  We must insure that, in the words of Abraham Lincoln, “government of the people, by the people and for the people shall not perish from the earth”.

29 December 2012

29 December 2012   

A MANDATE IS NOT A MANDATE WHEN DEMOCRATS WIN - SAY REPUBLICANS.

There is only one national election in the United States, It occurs every four years. That national election chooses the President of the United States.  He or she becomes the spokesperson of the American people and the commander in chief of the armed forces, the leader of his/her political party.  But, according to Republicans who lost the Presidential election this year the re-elected President won no mandate.

They even have the temerity to claim that the Republicans won a mandate by retaining a majority of the House of Representatives (where they lost eight seats). The House of Representatives elections, which occur every two years, are 435 separate district elections with 435 geographically determined constituencies.  Factors such as district apportionment and the popularity of incumbents, as well sometimes of local issues or particular local response to national issues, often determine the outcome of those races.  Rarely has the President’s party picked up seats when he was re-elected as the Democrats did this year.  And they gained in the Senate which consists of 33 statewide races every two years with state issue focus.

But the Republicans cannot concede to Obama a mandate from the voters.  Despite the fact that he joins the list of Presidents who were re-elected.  Despite the fact that in both of his elections he garnered over 50% of the popular vote a feat accomplished by only FDR in the 20th century. When Eisenhower and Reagan won their second terms Democrats who controlled Congress cooperated and oft  times deferred to his leadership.  When Clinton won a second term Republicans got a bit more cooperative, they stopped closing down the government.  But the Republican Party, which like the super rich they represent, feels entitled to control the Presidency. In fact it may be the only entitlement they support.  When a Democrat wins the Presidency it’s rule or ruin time for the Republicans.

It would appear at least from the polls that the American people have woken up to the Republican obstructionist intransigence. The President defeated McCain by ten million votes and after four years of intense negative attacks by the Republicans and their Tea Party masters he defeated Romney by five million votes nationwide. He has a mandate to fix the fiscal crisis in a fair way that requires the wealthy to pay the rate of taxes they paid in the 1990's and reform national insurance programs to the extent that such alterations will reduce the growing national debt. 

The American public is becoming more educated as to how the system works.  If the radical right wing Tea Party controlled Republicans play the party of NO for the next two years, I believe they will be replaced by a Democratic majority in the House and additional Democratic Senators and then they will learn what a Progressive mandate means.

4 December 2012

VOTER SUPPRESSION DELAWARE CO. (PA) STYLE

I served for sixteen years as the Chairman of the Delaware Co. (PA) Democratic Party and for the years 2010-12 as the Democratic member of the county Board of Elections.  The time period involved covered four Presidential elections 1996, 2000, 2004 and 2008.  I was chairman of a large municipal party in the county for the election of 1992.  In each of those years national candidates feared voter suppression efforts and organized out of county lawyers to combat them.  The voter suppression efforts didn’t happen and more often than not the outside attorneys got in the way of the local party activists who knew what they were doing.

This year 2012 is different.  There are clear signs of some practices that the Republicans, now run by new leaders and fearful of the growing Democratic registration, have sunk to.  I should also point out that Democrats won the Presidential elections in the county from 1992 through 2008 with increasing margins.

This year Delaware County found a loophole that enabled it to ignore Gov. Corbett's (a Rep.) edict to extend the deadlines for applying for and returning absentee ballots.   This year a surprising number of Republican poll workers in solidly Democratic precincts are calling in sick or otherwise not working so the Democrats are expected to find people to keep the polls open.  This has the effect of keeping those Democrats from other get out the vote tasks and it slows down the voting since some people at the tables will be new.  And this year in many precincts Republicans recruited friendly Democrats and got them appointed to precinct election boards (in one case even getting a Republican appointed to a position that the election law properly enforced would require the appointee to have been a Democrat.)

We will learn on Nov. 7th whether the Election Board returns to its practice, ended two years ago, of rejecting provisional ballots if the poll worker makes an error which is no fault of the voter thus denying a vote even if the voter is registered. Republican operatives are all over the place spreading the false rumor that the Presidential candidate is not part of the straight ticket trying to discourage Obama supporters from voting straight Democrat thus reducing the vote for the down ballot Democratic candidates.

In 2007 the Republicans tried to interfere with absentee voting in the Radnor township local elections and our party stopped them.  In 2011 they tried to change the results of a primary by rejecting 4 legitimate absentee votes and our election commissioner and his pro bono attorney stopped them.  This year the new Republican leadership in this county apparently is unafraid of the new Democratic leadership and so begins to go down the slippery slope of voter suppression.  One of the strongest and most effective Republican leaders I knew in this county once said “If we can’t win an election we deserve to lose.” The Republicans in Delaware County had better remember that - if the voter suppression is in any way effective this year, and even if it isn’t, we may well see a voter revolt in Delaware County that will say to the Republicans who run this county.  You may be able to win our votes but you can’t suppress them.

5 November 2012