Thurston County Democrats

Dear Zach,

Even though I think the effort of typing some words in response to this article (and to some of the comments at our recent Dem. monthly meeting,) will be fruitless, I would still like to make the effort because in my four or five years as PCO I've learned something...caucuses are pretty much a waste of time, effort and money.

Having never attended a caucus (I came on board with politics during the Dean phenomenon and it's still not a good match for me,) I found out I was in charge of my first caucus...and was site leader for 7 (!!!) other precincts.  I attended every inservice offered and still had "heqq" on my hands that Sat.  It was stressful, confusing, expensive, and generally bad and I was not alone in that assessment.  I won't even go into to the ethics questions having to do with PCOs possessing the results of the caucuses pretty much unsupervised for a length of time and the storing of the results at a private home afterward.  Very unsettling.

My second caucus experience was in 2006...and I had ONE attendee.  I guess one could say I had a 100% success rate because I persuaded her to become a PCO but I think anyone examining the amount of time, money, etc. that was expended on that Sat. was not returned in the way of any real success.

Politics is changing.  We need to change with it.  People do NOT want to come to meetings even though you might be in one of those "blue" places Dwight talked about where they do.  I really would like you both to consider trying something else...perhaps the system Debby talks about which seems sensible, realistic, and much more practical.  And you know what?  If someone is an "activist," he/she will become involved whether or not they attend a caucus.

Caucuses have their place.  But I think some new thinking has to occur and we should listen to the voices which are saying that something is wrong with them for us at this time and in this state.

Gail

------------- Forwarded Message: --------------
From: "Dwight Pelz" <dwight@wa-democrats.org>
To: <dwight@wa-democrats.org>
Subject: Caucus or Primary
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 19:26:07 +0000

Caucus or Primary
by Dwight Pelz, Chair WSDCC

This Saturday the Washington State Democratic Part will decide whether to allocate its delegates to the national convention by caucus or by primary.

I believe that the our system of presidential caucuses represents grassroots democracy at its best.

Caucus or Primary

Caucuses require candidates to launch grassroots campaigns to contact potential voters one on one, and make sure they turnout to their neighborhood caucus meeting.

Primaries reach voters through television advertising.

Caucuses test the true strength of our candidates and their campaign organizations.

Primaries test the ability of the candidates to raise money.

Caucuses require people to leave their homes and meet their neighbors on a Saturday afternoon, and engage in dialogue about the candidates and the direction of our nation.

A Washington Primary will be by all-mail ballot.  Voters will sit at the dining room table and mark a box on ballot, then drop it in the mail.

Caucuses build our party by bringing grassroots activists into a dynamic process.

Primaries reinforce the notion that participation in politics can be a solitary experience.

The Strengths of a Primary

Proponents of the allocation our delegates by Primary make one over-arching argument:

A Primary election will allow us to "ID" -- identify -- some 400,000 voters who take a ballot for a Democratic Presidential candidate.

It is absolutely correct that these ID’s would be valuable to Democrats.  However, these ID's to not represent the silver bullet of politics.  Many Republicans will vote for Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton or John Edwards or our other fine candidates, but then vote for Dave Reichert or Dino Rossi or Pam Roach.  We would never rate a voter as a Democrat based on this one vote in a Presidential Primary.

We Can Have Great Caucuses in 2008

The proposal from the Rules Committee calls for us to hold our Caucuses on Saturday, February 9.  This will be four days after "Super Tuesday" aka "Stupid Tuesday", when California, New York, Texas, Florida, Illinois, and maybe Michigan hold their huge primary.  As I have stated before, Stupid Tuesday is the test of the ability of these candidates to raise campaign cash, not to reach voters on a grassroots level.

But given the strengths of our Democratic candidates, I am convinced that this contest will not be decided on Feb. 5th .   On February 6th those candidates will look to the next test – Saturday Feb 9th, when Washington and Louisiana and maybe Michigan (they have not finalized their date) will be holding caucuses.  Candidates will choose to come to Washington that week, something that won’t happen if we have a Primary on Super Tuesday.  We can expect to have at our caucuses 100,000 passionate Democrats seeking to win back the White House.

We Can Have Great Caucuses and a Good Primary

Today Washington is slated to hold a Presidential Primary in May of 2008.  Democrats have proposed moving that forward to March 18, 2006.

If we choose our allocation of delegates on February 9 by Caucus, and then hold a non-binding Primary on March 18, the turnout to this Primary will still be very high.  If we predict 400,000 Democratic votes to a high stakes Primary, we can also expect 300,000 Democratic votes to a non-binding preference Primary on March.  That is 300,000 ID’s for our system.

Great Caucuses and a Good Primary.  I urge a YES vote for Caucuses!