Re: 💕 43rd Dems Meeting Feb. 19! 💕

[Annabelle Backman]

(Forwarding feedback to the full committee)

–

Annabelle Backman

Vice Chair for Technology | Washington State 43rd District Democrats

https://www.43rddemocrats.org/

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Philip Weiss <weiss....@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 12:00 PM
Subject: Re: 💕 43rd Dems Meeting Feb. 19! 💕
To: <byl...@43rddemocrats.org>

Hello,

I am the PCO for 43-2001.  I have some questions regarding the proposal to allow non-Democratic endorsements.

1. Your explanation mentions VoteBuilder, but doesn't say anything about what VoteBuilder entails.
2. Besides the possible loss of VoteBuilder access, no cons are discussed in the explanation.  Does the committee envision any possible drawbacks to the proposal?
3. The explanation notes other Democratic organizations that both have and do not have the prohibition.  Has the committee done any research into actual endorsements of non-Democratic party members by other local party orgs and what happened?
4. Would an endorsement of non-Democrats involve transferring any resources, access, etc. to organizations which have no accountability to the Democratic Party?  For example, if we were to endorse Kshama Sawant, would that give Socialist Alternative anything besides the endorsement fact to put on their candidate's promo materials?
5. Somewhat related, how difficult is it to revoke an endorsement?  If we endorse someone who is later revealed to do something antithetical to our aims or who abuses party resources, who has the authority to revoke our endorsement?

Also, at the meeting will the by-law changes be voted on individually or will it be a package deal?

Thank you for your time,

Philip Weiss

On Sat, Feb 9, 2019 at 3:08 PM 43rd Dems <communi...@43rddems.org> wrote:

Be a snowflake: unique individually, powerful in large groups

Happy Seattle Snowpocalypse, Philip! First, a friendly reminder: it's perfectly alright to be a snowflake, this week and every week. They are cute and unique individually, and powerful in large groups. 😉 #2020           Now that we've elected a new Executive Board, it's time to adopt bylaws, discuss upcoming resolutions, and prepare for the next election cycle! Update: King County's Kickoff and Bylaws Vote event is now rescheduled for Sat. Feb.23! About the 43rd's February meeting. Our next meeting will take place on February 19th, 2019 from 7:00 to 9:00 PM at 6615 Dayton Ave N. at the Phinney Neighborhood Association, lower building. Please click "Going" on Facebook by following this link if you plan on attending! (Parking information available at bottom of email). ACTION ITEMS FOR FEBRUARY MEETING 💖February Agenda 💖Fair & Free Election Resolution 💖Bylaws Amendment Proposal for February 2019 💖 January Minutes Still reading? Great! We need to talk about membership. 🥰 Renewing your membership or becoming a member for the first time is both easy, and affordable! Your generous contribution helps us with operating costs and doing the work that is needed to ensure continued victories! We can't do this without you – each new membership renewal helps us expand our reach and build our communities from the grassroots up! ALCOHOL DISCLAIMER To continue the 43rd's mission as being inclusive and accessible to all our members, both present and prospective, alcohol will no longer be permitted at official 43rd meetings. As always, we encourage folks to bring beverages or light libations to share! DIRECTIONS & PARKING There are two main buildings for the PNA. The address for the lower building is 6615 Dayton Ave N, Seattle, WA 98103. We meet in the lower building, which is brick and further to the east. The parking lot is located between the two buildings and there is an entrance on both the east and west sides of the lower building. Learn more by clicking here! All the best, Joey Wieser Vice Chair for Communications Sent via ActionNetwork.org. To update your email address, change your name or address, or to stop receiving emails from 43rd District Democrats, please click here.

[Annabelle Backman]

Hi Philip,

Thank you for sending in the questions - I apologize for not noticing your earlier email.

Now to attempt to answer your questions:

1. Your explanation mentions VoteBuilder, but doesn't say anything about what VoteBuilder entails.

VoteBuilder is the software application that the Democratic Party uses to manage and share voter information: contact info, party affiliation, contact history, etc. It is used by campaigns and local party organizations such as the 43rd Legislative Democrats to organize walk lists for door-to-door canvassing and Get Out the Vote efforts.

2. Besides the possible loss of VoteBuilder access, no cons are discussed in the explanation.  Does the committee envision any possible drawbacks to the proposal?

As I recall when this was debated at the January general meeting, VoteBuilder access was the major tangible concern raised. Other concerns were more philosophical in nature, e.g., does the endorsement of non-Democrats go against the stated purpose of the organization. Speaking for myself, I suppose it is possible that an endorsement of a non-Democrat could alienate other Democrat candidates or organizations, but given our constituency and the types of candidates we tend to engage with, I think that risk is minimal.

 3. The explanation notes other Democratic organizations that both have and do not have the prohibition.  Has the committee done any research into actual endorsements of non-Democratic party members by other local party orgs and what happened?

Brad, you put together the research into other organizations. Was this something you looked into? Have any of these organizations issued any endorsements of non-Democrats?

4. Would an endorsement of non-Democrats involve transferring any resources, access, etc. to organizations which have no accountability to the Democratic Party?  For example, if we were to endorse Kshama Sawant, would that give Socialist Alternative anything besides the endorsement fact to put on their candidate's promo materials?

No. §14.4 of the current bylaws state that "the Executive Board, nor PCOs or Membership may not authorize any contributions to any candidate, ballot issue, or political committee, or any activity related to a Political Action Committee (PAC)." And while §15.7 states that "The records and membership list of the 43rd District shall be made available as provided in the 43rd District’s endorsement procedures or as required by law," neither our endorsement rules nor the endorsement-related provisions in the bylaws provide any conditions under which the 43rd District Democrats would share its membership list with endorsed campaigns.

5. Somewhat related, how difficult is it to revoke an endorsement?  If we endorse someone who is later revealed to do something antithetical to our aims or who abuses party resources, who has the authority to revoke our endorsement?

 According to §13.1, "Endorsements may be revoked using the same procedures used for making endorsements." That means that only the membership has the power to revoke an endorsement. The threshold for such a vote would be 60% of ballots cast, and notice of the vote would have to be published at least 10 days in advance.

Please let us know if you have any other questions or feedback. Thanks!

–

Annabelle Backman

Vice Chair for Technology | Washington State 43rd District Democrats

https://www.43rddemocrats.org/

[Brad Bell]

I have not looked into that history, but the specific language of our prohibition is that candidates "must declare as Democrats" - since most jurisdictions do not require candidates to declare anything one way or the other, it seems highly unlikely other orgs have never made an endorsement of someone who didn't make this declaration.

Brad

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "43rd District Democrats Rules and Bylaws Committee" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to 43rd-bylaws...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to 43rd-...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/43rd-bylaws/CABRLSOsjmnXJw5ioj%3DYrB%2B531oihfEqXd6zTGF8tk1svDDSe6Q%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Angyl]

Re item 4 after some restating:

Right now the 43rd is not a PAC and can’t legally offer anything of substance to those they Endorse - this is why we didn’t get a printed Endorsement walk sheet last year for example.

If the 43rd opened a PAC again in the future, the aforecited bylaws restricting PAC activity would have to be changed. Someone could also (and probably would tbh) propose amending the Endorsements restriction either direction, whichever that is by then, again while we’re at it. The will of the body at that time would determine the outcome.

However, King County (Bylaws vote Feb23) has an option on the table to automatically endorse per LDs. IF that passed, AND the 43rd did actually endorse a non-declared-Dem, AND KC Bylaws conflict that, there would definitely be a lot more long boring Rules Committee talks to figure it out. Ultimately either KCDCC do give material PAC support to said Endorsee or they do not. It’s a series of long shots but it’s not completely impossible, and ultimately it’s the decision of KCDCC under guidance of the KC PCOs’ votes.

Also, please note any other LD could potentially wind up in the same position under the same set of circumstances, so it’s an open possibility regardless of the 43rd’s choices.

This is really highly unlikely but I deeply don’t want anyone feeling betrayed if somehow the dice roll straight 20s. The consequences don’t seem terribly dire unless you’re on the rules committees. 😂 Maybe farthest case scenario the candidate gets a slot on a flyer and like a FB ad or something from KCDCC, and everybody votes on Bylaws one more time to see if that changed their mind.

Re item 5 Revoking

Revoking of Endorsements has happened quite a few times in various Dem orgs in the last few years, so it’s not uncharted ground and hasn’t that I’ve seen so far shown any failure modes in using the same process as the original endorsement.

- Angyl

Sent from ProtonMail Mobile

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/43rd-bylaws/CACOE%2Bxb2T8Bsr0p9qReiCp7%3DpHE3RbaATWPWepu772xvaCihDQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Amy Madden]

Re: the automatic endorsement option, it's my understanding that it has has been taken off the table for the KCD bylaws (unless someone resubmitted the idea as a floor amendment). The KCD BRC (Bylaws and Rules Committee) is supporting a plan to give KCD the option to endorse rather than making it automatic, and they've talked about how focus will likely be on purple districts and other areas outside strong Dem LDs like the 43rd and 36th.

More info re: the proposals being considered here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ONVRcyp2rlDHUvfVJb-5ox5xCUXXUmr_jpn0ZHrYSl4/edit#heading=h.4xb6lodkcsw7

However, King County (Bylaws vote Feb23) has an option on the table to automatically endorse per LDs. IF that passed, AND the 43rd did actually endorse a non-declared-Dem, AND KC Bylaws conflict that, there would definitely be a lot more long boring Rules Committee talks to figure it out. Ultimately either KCDCC do give material PAC support to said Endorsee or they do not. It’s a series of long shots but it’s not completely impossible, and ultimately it’s the decision of KCDCC under guidance of the KC PCOs’ votes.

Amy Madden

Washington State Democratic Central Committee Member, 43rd LD
Western WA Vice Chair, Economic Justice Caucus of the WA State Democrats

At-Large Board Member, Environment and Climate Caucus of the WA State Democrats

(206) 633-4617 ⚬ wsdc...@43rddems.org

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/43rd-bylaws/FPVqfV2CIZZrh081NmPylwmHrH0_Py23qGroZsrewXgV13AGWZX0ae5-fsCi5KohXTps5u34iiG52KIJ8qane2axRIRYEDGxqstzAQaaqNo%3D%40protonmail.com.

[Brad Bell]

I was just reminded of the 2016 election for state treasurer. No Democrats made it past the top two primary, and multiple groups endorsed one of the Republicans, including at least the Jefferson and Whatcom County Democrats. This is actually a partisan race, but it should be sufficient to show that there isn't any blanket prohibition from above.

On Thu, Feb 14, 2019 at 10:49 AM Philip Weiss <weiss....@gmail.com> wrote:

Thank you for the answers. That makes the issues more philosophical than practical.

Phil.

Sent from Mailspring, the best free email app for work

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "43rd District Democrats Rules and Bylaws Committee" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to 43rd-bylaws...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to 43rd-...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/43rd-bylaws/CABRLSOsjmnXJw5ioj%3DYrB%2B531oihfEqXd6zTGF8tk1svDDSe6Q%40mail.gmail.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "43rd District Democrats Rules and Bylaws Committee" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to 43rd-bylaws...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to 43rd-...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/43rd-bylaws/CACOE%2Bxb2T8Bsr0p9qReiCp7%3DpHE3RbaATWPWepu772xvaCihDQ%40mail.gmail.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.