FeedsFake Endorsement Charade Continues; Threatens Legitimacy of New PDA Chapter
As you all know, there's been a lot said regarding the would-be endorsement from Oregon's new Progressive Democrats of America (PDA) chapter. The chapter was founded very, very recently by Novick for Senate staffer Liz Kimmerly, and had planned to go forward with formal endorsement proceedings at tonight's meeting. For a recap of what's happened, I would refer to Kari Chisholm's BlueOregon post on the matter, as well as the posts by Brad over at Foreward Oregon and over at the Senate2008Guru and SwingStateProject. Many questions were posed: how much did the Novick campaign know about Kimmerly's activities? Is the endorsement a sham? What the heck is going on here?
Tonight I attended the PDA meeting, which showed me just how problematic this endorsement process has become. If it goes forward, I assert that it will lack legitimacy and will demonstrate just how the Novick campaign attempted to rig an endorsement. It's an ethical mess, and those involved should be ashamed of themselves. We're DEMOCRATS, people! We don't need to adopt the Republican code of ethics here! Furthermore, what should have been a meeting about the new formation of a chapter of an important organization degenerated merely into an hour-long endorsement talk. To recap, I'm going to go ahead and go over the night's meeting and offer my observations.
When the meeting began, roughly 45 people were present. But it felt like a Novick campaign rally. Steve and several members of his staff were present. In fact, many individuals asked me if I was a Novick staffer (I guess the jacket and comb-job did it). Also present were Candy Neville (who says she only got an invite two days ago) and Jon Isaacs, Jeff Merkley's campaign manager. Beyond the known partisans, there were many dedicated progressives, looking to form a group chapter so they could make a difference.
Talk immediately went to the endorsement. I know it has been a hot-button issue this week, but it strikes me as odd that the first business of a newly-forming chapter would be to talk of endorsements. It also struck me as strange that, before Moses Ross took over the process, Kimmerly spoke as if the endorsement would be happening *tonight*. Indeed, unless I'm mistaken she spoke about giving the candidates (or their surrogates) time to speak and then having a vote. Ross quickly stepped in and slowed the process down (but what would have happened if it hadn't?).
As soon as Ross took over, almost immediately a Q&A began. There were questions about the relationship of the local to the national group, and of the local chapter's position in the Oregon Democratic sphere. Then Jon Isaacs stepped up and offered that he didn't want to see a continued politicization of the endorsement process, and that he recommended not endorsing in the primary. Considering the heavy-hitting stuff that has come out this week, Jon could have been a lot more dogged; but he made a point to note his love and support for the PDA, and that he just wanted to offer his advice. Throughout the night, the non-endorsement suggestion was repeatedly shot down: people weighed in over and over again, noting that an endorsement was important. Indeed, Ross himself suggested that an endorsement defines the character of an organization.
If that's the case, then I worry that the Novick campaign has worked to destroy this new chapter's credibility before it evens gets off of the ground. First, Kimmerly was a major facilitator in the meeting and never once disclosed her relationship to the Novick campaign to the general audience at tonight's meeting (or, for that matter, she didn't step aside considering the controversy); and that tops her earlier role as would-be endorsement facilitator. Next, as Jon Isaacs pointed out, the Novick campaign was doing turnout calls for the meeting and the place felt stuffed with Novick backers, people who were there for a candidate and not necessarily for the PDA (even if they like the PDA). Furthermore, the rules for joining the PDA are liberal; simply give your name and e-mail and, five days later you're a voting member. These rules are fine, but potential manipulation of a new caucus for the purposes of gaining an endorsement is not. It would be unethical, ridiculous, and wrong. It would be a Republican-lite tactic.
I'd love to say that the meeting was more than an endorsement meeting, but it wasn't. Candy Neville spoke eloquently about her passions: ending the war and universal healthcare, to name the centerpieces. Steve Novick drew a folksy analogy between the three main Democratic Presidential hopefuls and himself. Jon Isaacs presented Jeff Merkley, and spoke to Jeff's fine history and record. But there was no organizing done. It's as if the meeting was about the endorsement and, when it didn't happen, the wind left the sails. No substantive discussion about the chapter's mission or purpose occurred, and that's a shame, as I really hope this group gets off of the ground and can be a forceful, progressive voice here in Oregon. Instead, the meeting was driven purely to the endorsement talk by the partisans who wanted one to happen.
But so many questions linger. Indeed, if the Novick campaign was making turnout calls to get people to this near-endorsement meeting, what was their intent in doing so? Indeed, several individuals spoke up at multiple points, noting how disappointed they were at being unable to endorse someone *tonight*. Why didn't Kimmerly recuse herself from the process and the conflict of interest and why didn't anyone acknowledge the numerous ethical dilemmas that surround this mess? Why the heck wasn't anything beyond endorsement discussed in a substantial way? I was told there was "full agenda," but I guess the endorsement was all the organizers and partisans really wanted to talk about.
I love the PDA, but this is all saddening and baffling. I usually don't like to drag things down into the dirt, but, in this case, I didn't need to: it was already there. That no one directly involved did anything tonight to attempt to lift it out amazes me. Am I the only one to feel that an endorsement from this new group, given all that has happened, would damage its reputation? The last thing we need is a new chapter of an important group to be damaged because one campaign (or at least some of its officials) wanted to game the system by driving a new group (that a campaign staffer launched!) to a rushed, almost-certainly partisan endorsement. At least the vote was delayed for a month, but there was no talk about how the membership would approach the endorsement or would organize in any real way. Indeed, once the talk of endorsement was over, everyone just got up and left!
And that's why tonight's event was just a mystifying mess. Nothing substantial happened to organize this new, progressive group; and that's perhaps the worst part of all.
Stumble It!We use Markdown to style our comments. **This is bolded.** *This is italic.* [This is a link](url)
For more options,
try reading the
wikipedia article or the
official style guide.
Comments
Comments from site editors have a darker background than comments from everybody else.I was there too.
One thing that really struck me was Candy Neville's statement that she'd only received an email invitation two days ago. We know from the Blue Oregon post that the Merkley campaign received an email invitation FOUR days ago. Why the disparity?
What happened two days ago that might have led Liz Kimmerly to believe it would be in her best interests to invite someone other than Jeff Merkley for her little sham "endorsement" meeting?
Two days ago David Steve's of the Register Guard broke this shameful story by publishing it in that newspaper. He did mention in that piece that Candy Neville had been invited. But since we know that Jeff Merkley had been invited TWO DAYS before Candy Neville was invited, Occam's Razor points squarely to David Steves nosing around for details prior to publishing the story as the motivation for Liz Kimmerly to change plans and try to make a silk purse out of the proverbial sow's ear.
We use Markdown to style our comments. **This is bolded.** *This is italic.* [This is a link](url)
For more options, try reading the wikipedia article or the official style guide.
This is really disappointing. It would seem that the unethical behavior by the Novick campaign has made the PDA radioactive. It appears that Novick and the rest of his campaign staff embrace these underhanded tactics, and shows a lack of a moral compass. If you removed the names and told me this story I would assume that this was a stunt pulled by Bush/Rove/Cheney. We need to elect better Democrats, I'm just glad that I have the opportunity to vote for Jeff Merkley this May and again in November.
We use Markdown to style our comments. **This is bolded.** *This is italic.* [This is a link](url)
For more options, try reading the wikipedia article or the official style guide.
Why the disparity?
Actually, the e-mails posted by Kari clearly show that Neville was included in all three e-mails, including the one sent on Tuesday.
Maybe she didn't receive it for whatever reason, but I just wanted to point out that she was indeed included in the e-mail according to what Kari posted.
We use Markdown to style our comments. **This is bolded.** *This is italic.* [This is a link](url)
For more options, try reading the wikipedia article or the official style guide.
Jenni,
You're right. It does say that in the email he posted. I was going off of what Candy herself said tonight. Perhaps she simply didn't get it until two days later. I don't know. I just know what Candy said tonight.
Something else that came out tonight is that the PDA guidelines stipulate that a person has to be a member for 5 days before they can vote on an endorsement. The above mentioned email was sent out 4 days prior to what it said was to be an endorsement. Obviously that would have meant that regardless of who showed up and expressed a desire to join, only Liz and her compatriots would have been able to vote. Convenient?
We use Markdown to style our comments. **This is bolded.** *This is italic.* [This is a link](url)
For more options, try reading the wikipedia article or the official style guide.
Actually, those who had already signed up as members of PDA prior to this meeting would have been able to vote as well.
Like I said, I received forwards from a few people who were on the PDA email list and received notice of the meeting. I don't know why some people didn't (maybe the list was cut down to those in certain cities, zip codes, whatever, I can't say since I didn't send the email). But I know some people did indeed get the email.
But I can say that I did not get any email from the campaign encouraging me to join PDA for the endorsement. Just to verify, I went to my MSN and Yahoo accounts, which were originally signed up to the lists to check delivery and how the e-mails looked on the various systems. I have unread messages from the campaign going back months in my inboxes. Not one email mentioned PDA, the meeting, etc.
I'm on the email list, plus an action list. I didn't get anything on any of them. There was an item on the web site, although I have to say I hadn't gone over there to read it so I can't say what it said or what day it went up. So as far as I can see there wasn't an organized effort to get us Novick supporters signed up and then to attend the meeting.
I'm just giving you my perspective on this as someone who has used these email systems before, gets the Novick emails, etc. I'm withholding any conclusions on this situation until I get all the details from all the sides involved. I've been in the position to make some pretty stupid mistakes myself in the past while working with campaigns and such, and have on more than one occasion been attacked before the details were aired. So other than pointing out inconsistencies and info that I have from working in similar situations, I've tried to stay out of the discussion.
We use Markdown to style our comments. **This is bolded.** *This is italic.* [This is a link](url)
For more options, try reading the wikipedia article or the official style guide.
As a long-time PDA member I'm sorely disappointed in this turn of events. For the organization's first entry into the local political scene to be hijacked by a single candidate's campaign is tragic. Such a para-party group can be instrumental in getting those things done that the party itself can't on the one hand, and moving party policy and platform in a progressive direction on the other. To be effective in either role, credibility is key.
All is not lost. PDA's policy is to encourage and support formation of chapters in each congressional district. Lets hope that additional groups form and follow more closely both the spirit and letter of the guidelines provided by the national organization. They'll have the additional obstacle of this sorry episode and its fallout to overcome, but one sockpuppet chapter need not be the end of PDA in Oregon.
We use Markdown to style our comments. **This is bolded.** *This is italic.* [This is a link](url)
For more options, try reading the wikipedia article or the official style guide.
John, that's exactly my feeling. The PDA is vital and can recover, but will need nurturing to ensure its legitimacy and efficacy moving forward.
We use Markdown to style our comments. **This is bolded.** *This is italic.* [This is a link](url)
For more options, try reading the wikipedia article or the official style guide.
Actually I think it would also be good not to give up the fight on this chapter too, in part by PDA members contacting the national level about it.
In the debate over at BlueOregon about the possible attempt to hijack the endorsement process, one of the points advanced in Liz Kimmerly's favor is her longtime involvement with PDA, much preceding her involvement with the Novick campaign.
If she really cares about PDA, someone else who does too needs to take her aside and tell her she's hurting the organization. Apart from any implications for the senate primary, this is a disgraceful way to treat the organization and its membership.
Anyone interested in strong progressive politics in Oregon should be concerned about these developments because this is an organization we should want well-established for the long haul, and for many campaigns.
We use Markdown to style our comments. **This is bolded.** *This is italic.* [This is a link](url)
For more options, try reading the wikipedia article or the official style guide.
Good advice, Chris, and not just because I had already thought of it and acted upon it myself.
E-mail addresses of Tim Carpenter, PDA National Director; and Diane Shamis, PDA Field Director, as well as a web-based contact form are available on the PDA website: [[http://pdamerica.org/contact.php]]
We use Markdown to style our comments. **This is bolded.** *This is italic.* [This is a link](url)
For more options, try reading the wikipedia article or the official style guide.
Oops. Just to prove I can read and follow written instructions (at least on the second try), here's that URL again, and this time clickable:
http://pdamerica.org/contact.php
We use Markdown to style our comments. **This is bolded.** *This is italic.* [This is a link](url)
For more options, try reading the wikipedia article or the official style guide.
And that is the whole point of why the issue about conflict of interest is relevant and why polices and the importance of steering clear of such conflicts is so important in the Democratic (big or small d versions) is so crucial.
For all I or anyone knows, Liz's intentions and motives may be 100% pure and clean. But her actions and lack of judgment in not realizing or knowing what she was doing have tainted the entire process. For all we know she may have filtered who got notification, intentionally gamed the system, etc. She may not have tried to do anything along those lines, but she may very well have. Which is why rules and polices exist, to mitigate that.
But this points to larger judgment issues of the campaign itself. Jake and Steve should have known better and speaks to their poor judgment. A endorsement invitation form his own employee a the coordinator of said groups endorsement should have sent off an alarm bell which in the Merkley campaign would have cost her the job in the campaign, bodes ill (seriously ill) for either being out of their league, or they actual ethics.
I have up to this point refrained form going negative against Novick or his campaign, but this is a red flag people. It may be a relatively minor incident, but it speaks to a much more serious an issue of lack of judgment (at best) or an ethical deficiency (the more damning) neither of which are good.
We use Markdown to style our comments. **This is bolded.** *This is italic.* [This is a link](url)
For more options, try reading the wikipedia article or the official style guide.
Even worse news. I am still hoping for a a course change and increasing legitimacy, but this does not bode well. I wish I could have been there. Damn being out of state.
We use Markdown to style our comments. **This is bolded.** *This is italic.* [This is a link](url)
For more options, try reading the wikipedia article or the official style guide.
The Communist Party was able to avoid all this sniping by killing dissenters and prohibiting the formation of non sanctioned organizations. Maybe Democrats should try it?
In solidarity!
Mister Tee
We use Markdown to style our comments. **This is bolded.** *This is italic.* [This is a link](url)
For more options, try reading the wikipedia article or the official style guide.
I can't believe Kimmerly was there. I thought at the very least, she would have excused herself from the process. This is just wrong. I held off on being a little feisty when it came to this topic, but this is just unethical.
We use Markdown to style our comments. **This is bolded.** *This is italic.* [This is a link](url)
For more options, try reading the wikipedia article or the official style guide.
And that's what finally got me, Sarah. I had enough when, throughout the course of the meeting, no one spoke of the relationship between Kimmerly and the Novick campaign. I had gone under the assumption that disclosure would be inevitable; but when it didn't come I was stunned.
We use Markdown to style our comments. **This is bolded.** *This is italic.* [This is a link](url)
For more options, try reading the wikipedia article or the official style guide.
Hey everyone, Kevin over at Preemptive Karma has a nice blog post about his take on the event. He attended with me, and shares my concerns.
Here's the link: http://www.preemptivekarma.com/archives/2008/01/a_shiny_moment.html
We use Markdown to style our comments. **This is bolded.** *This is italic.* [This is a link](url)
For more options, try reading the wikipedia article or the official style guide.