Burnt Orange ReportNews, Politics, and Fun From Deep in the Heart of Texas |
![]() |
August 11, 2005Texas @ YDA: Another PerspectiveBy Kirk McPikeLast week, like Byron and Katie, I was a delegate to the 2005 Young Democrats of America National Convention. And yes, like all the Texas delegates, I was part of the big brawl on the convention floor. While it was exhilarating to be in such a hotly-contested situation, the fight itself was truly awful. However, just as awful has been much of the subsequent discussion of the Texas vote and the implicit charge that there was a concerted effort within the Texas delegation to disenfranchise certain delegates. This is simply not the case. While one might argue that disenfranchisement occurred, it cannot be argued that disenfranchisement was anyone's goal. Idealism vs. Realism As has been discussed, this convention offered Texas a unique opportunity to win a victory that would benefit our state for years to come. We had a great candidate who was running for the male spot on the Democratic National Committee: Giovanni Garibay. And not only was he running, he was a part of the Chris Gallaway ticket and had a very good chance of winning. It was his presence on Gallaway's ticket that led to the blow up on the floor, as it incurred a reciprocal relationship that some delegates did not want to support. The home states of the other candidates on the Gallaway ticket provided roughly 50% of the votes Giovanni received in his race. Without their support, Gio would have lost. Because of this support of Gio and Texas, it was incumbent upon us to respond in kind. In this case, reciprocation meant delivering around 90% of our vote to Chris Gallaway in the presidential race (and the EVP race, but the controversy was with the first race and our votes veered wildly after that... more later). Giovanni held to the honorable position that not delivering such support would violate his alliance with the ticket, requiring him to step down from his campaign. This left the leadership of the Texas delegation with an unpleasant political reality. This reality cannot simply be ignored, but I think it has been in much of the subsequent discussion. To have allowed more than 10 votes from Texas to be cast for Alex de Ocampo for YDA president would have done great harm to Texas's position on the national scene. We would have lost our chance to have a voice on the Democratic National Committee. We would have failed to support those who had supported us, which would have raised real barriers to any future national office candidates from Texas. This option was practically untenable. However, to limit the votes of those who were voting for Alex de Ocampo would seem "wrong" in an idealistic sort of way. Even though conventions are not "one person, one vote" situations, and instead are based around delegation vote apportionment, there is a powerful emotional argument here. This option is philosophically unpleasant. Veronica De LaFuente, the head of the Texas delegation, chose practicality over idealism. She did the best she could to allow the minority in our caucus — and it was a small minority — as much voice as was possible without endangering the position of the entire state. You may not like the decision she made, but there was at that point no other realistic option. Veronica clearly didn't enjoy her task, but she had the courage to do what was right for the entire state, no matter how much it upset some delegates. She did the best she could to balance Texas's interests and voter independence; many state delegations made no such effort, and truly disenfranchised those who wouldn't vote along slate lines. The subsequent character assassination being leveled against Veronica is unfair. Her decision was not malicious. At worst, it could be accused of being a bit cynical, but that's how politics works. Regardless, she did the practical thing. And, for the good of our state, the right thing. Texas is stronger, and better represented, within YDA than it has been in decades because of the hard choice Veronica made. Make no mistake: Texas had a lot to lose. By the time our floor fight ended, Gallaway had already won, but Texas had not. With the Gallaway ticket-supported victory of Giovanni, Texas eventually came out on top. We've got a great guy representing our young people on the Democratic National Committee. That's something to be proud of — but let's not forget that we only won because of the decisions made by our delegation leadership. Blind Spots Galore And, please, let's not canonize all the Unity supporters just yet. There was plenty of poor behavior on all sides, in all delegations. On the second night of the convention, a Unity-backer from Texas accused me of having "no business being at the convention," and during the floor fight spat the same insult at another Dallas delegate. The broader Unity campaig was, at times, downright spiteful (and quite off-putting, perhaps explaining their average take of 40% of the vote). Also, it should be noted that Texas's voting was much freer than that of many states. No effort was made in Texas to truly disenfranchise those in the political minority by refusing them delegate status. This happened elsewhere. Over the course of the election, Texas's vote veered wildly, giving a majority to one Unity candidate (Dwayne Bensing) and splitting our votes basically evenly in the hotly-contested race for Secretary. None of the other candidate home states supported nearly as broad a spectrum of candidates from both tickets. Had there been true "disenfranchisement," such varying support would never have taken place. Full Disclosure Just to be transparent: I was a Chris Gallaway supporter. Chris spoke to the July meeting of the Dallas County Young Democrats, and gave an impressive presentation on his goals for the future of YDA. I think he has done a great job as president, and that he will do a lot to help Texas. I was also unimpressed with his opponent, who would merely stammer vaguely and shift nervously from one foot to the other when asked how his administration would benefit Texas. Naturally, I was strongly supportive of Giovanni. I also backed Rob Dolin from the Unity ticket, who was eventually elected YDA Secretary. Rob's a great guy, is full of ideas, is very positive and I'm glad to consider him a friend. Beyond those three races, I voted the Gallaway ticket down the line. In the end, the convention was both great for Texas and brutally scarring. We're in a much better position nationally now, but I fear that many of the cleavages opened up at our April convention have grown into chasms. The leadership and membership of the Texas Young Democrats have a hard task ahead in repairing these fissures. Let's hope they, and we, are up to it. Posted by Kirk McPike at August 11, 2005 10:31 AM | TrackBackComments
Very interesting perspective and I'm glad to read a different side. I was not able to go to the convention, but in my opinion, any time "one man, one vote" is not allowed, it's a bad thing, regardless of whether or not "our guy" wins. The fact is, we should be electing folks that would best represent all Young Democrats, and Democrats period, not who could best benefit out state. Now, with that said, I would have voted for Gio, but that should not determine my vote on any other issue. Who is to say if Galloway lost, that Gio would as well? That seems like a slippery slope to me. I think the bottom line is no one should ever be told how they can or cannot vote. That is not the democratic way, nor the Democratic way. We, as Democrats, have a higher responsibility to make sure every vote is counted, as our voters are constantly denied their rights, why should we do so in our own conventions? It is this sort of distasteful behavior, and the defenses of it, that make most Americans sick of politics. I'm starting to count myself as one of them. Posted by: Matthew at August 11, 2005 12:53 PMwhy are we still talking about this? No offense but the YDs really aren't all that important. Can we talk about real issues? Posted by: MTM at August 12, 2005 02:03 PM"Giovanni held to the honorable position that not delivering such support would violate his alliance with the ticket, requiring him to step down from his campaign." You simply reveal that poltical allegiances were more important than principles for you. Your argument exemplifies what is wrong with the Young Democrats of America. It exemplifies why Gallaway won, and why there was voter disenfranchisement. You seem to think it's okay to disallow voters to vote for who they believe, in the interest of politics. The best interests of Texas would be served by allowing all Texas delegates to vote for who they believe in. The fact that many of the later votes were more spread out prove that De Ocampo should have received more votes. He had more supporters in TX and it's obvious that their votes were suppressed, again, in the interest of politics. Posted by: CAg at August 13, 2005 02:44 PMPost a comment
|
|