- 'An End to the Southern Strategy, But No Post-Racial America' says David Love
- "A Question of Place": An essay on the power of community
- Just Equally Speaking….
- Eagles owe Philadelphia the 8 million it needs to keep libraries open
- who would like to see Verizon offer cable TV in Phila?
- Council Committee Passed the Freeze
- Carol Campbell Passes Away
- My first trip to the public library
- Fight digital exclusion
- What if half of Philadelphia didn't have roads?
Nutter's first test?
Submitted by Ben Waxman on Sun, 05/20/2007 - 2:28pm.
Tomorrow, Michael Nutter will be meeting with the Democratic City Committee. Bob Brady has asked all of the ward leaders to attend and unite behind the Democratic nominee. I am glad to see the candidates are making nice, since all of them have an important role to play in addressing the critical issues facing our city. Still, I hope that Nutter doesn’t forget that he won the primary by offering himself as the candidate of change. His appearance before the City Committee is his first chance to show his commitment to real reform.
Personally, I would like to see Nutter challenge the local party to be more transparent and inclusive. As mayor, Nutter will have a great deal of influence over the direction of the City Committee. I am not advocating that he replace Bob Brady as chairman, but there are some changes that definitely need to happen.
We need to make it easier for people who want to get involved in the party plugged in. Frankly, I think this would be good for everyone. Fresh blood always reinvigorates organizations and the City Committee is no exception. Right now, it can be both confusing and frustrating to get involved in the local party. The City Committee could undertake a variety of activities, like a voter registration campaign, that would mobilize people and help build for the 2008 election.
In addition to reaching out to new activists, the party must also become more transparent. A few months ago, we had a discussion about allowing rank-and-file Democrats into endorsement meetings. At first, I was skeptical of the idea. I’ve changed my mind. There really isn’t any good reason that local activists shouldn’t be allowed to attend endorsement meetings. This includes both local ward meetings and citywide endorsements. The City Committee also needs to have a website that lists endorsements, contributions, and other activities. Grassroots Democrats have a right to know how the party is spending its money.
Finally, I think the City Committee needs to refocus itself to help the Democratic Party win on a statewide level. Philadelphia Democrats can provide invaluable resources to local party activists across the state. In particular, we need to be providing money, volunteers, and other types of support to our suburban counterparts. There will be a huge fight in Montgomery County and Buck County to preserve and expand the Democratic majority in the Pa. House of Representatives. The Philadelphia City Committee can really make a difference in these races.
What other reforms are necessary? And, more importantly, will Nutter be willing to take a stand and fight for these changes?
Bookmark/Search this post with:
Good post!
I don't have a lot to add but I wait to hear what comes out of this meeting with baited breath. In many ways Nutter's win shows a new way forward for Philly Democratic Politics and I sincerely hope that the PCC is willing to look at Nutter's support as a path to bring more regualr people, more neighborhood activists, more support into a more open transparent party.
Regionalism in Government, Regionalism in Politics
I think that this idea is particularly good:
It appeals directly to the city committee's strengths, and would be a good political stick to brandish behind Nutter's push for regional cooperation in government. If the state reps and senators in Bucks, Chester, Delaware, and Montgomery counties don't want to get together to push for things like SEPTA funding, people from the city committee might be able to help put people in office who do.
There is a Democratic State
There is a Democratic State Committee which is committed to elected Democrats state wide.
The issue most have in participating, and a lot of ward leaders/elected officials are State Committee members, is that the issues in other parts of the state are very different from Philly. Aside from that, a lot of the Democrats live in Philly or Pittsburgh.
As for the regionalism, you will find that a major barrier is the fact that folks in other parts of the state HATE Philly, even true in Montgomery and Bucks County where there are more Rockerfeller Republicans -- and some George Bush ones too.
Wah wah on ward politics
I often see posts saying why and how City Committee should change. This ignores the first rule of politics (and for that matter life). If you want someone to do something you have to show them why it is good for them, not good for you. People have the right to know how their money is spent not how other people spend money. All PAC expenses are public. No one has demonstrated what bloggers can add to the ward. If you want to get involved with the ward get involved on its terms (or change the structure, or beat the ward leader). Just because you want something does not mean you get it. Jeeze I thought my generation was spoiled
And just how good a job has the Philly Dem Party done of
showing Philadelphians its value, when you consider that the vast majority don't even vote -- particularly in the poor and minority commmunites? It seems that the Philly Dem Party hasn't done a very good job of showing people it's value either.
People have a right to know how their money is spent? How good a job has the City government, controlled by the Democratic Party, done in explaining to people where their tax money is going?
Lou, I pointed out in my
Lou,
I pointed out in my post that new blood would be good for the party as a whole. Wouldn't your own turnout efforts in 2008 be helped if there were 200 young activists that were mobilized to work with the ward leaders? How could that be a bad thing for the Democratic Party?
If you don't agree with my suggestions, do you have your own ideas for how the Democratic City Committee can help Democrats in other parts of the state? You have to admit that our own cup overflowth with dollars and people. I don't think there is anything wrong with suggesting that our local party do more to support other people working in less Democratic areas.
Right now, there are a lot of young people who want to get plugged into local politics. There are a vareity of reasons for this, but a lot of it comes from a desire to beat the Republicans. Can we figure out ways to bridge these divides?
---
Check out my blog!
New Blood
As I have stated in numerous posts that I would welcome new people to become involved. In my ward it can be tough because many of the young people who live in the ward aren't registered here (taxes, car insurance, jury duty). I previously related my PFC story where I wanted to plug in people to empty divisions and never heard from anyone. I brought in two Committee people under 25 just last week.
As to turnout for state wide races the 21st is second to no one. We got more votes for Casey than 29 counties, more for Rendell than 36. In my division in 2004 there was not one registered Democrat that did not vote and we had the second highest votes for Kerry in the City. If anyone wants to help out in the ward, please contact me.
New Blood
O.K. Lou, count me is as a wanna be net time you need a committee man.
How about votes, canvassers,
How about votes, canvassers, and vollunteers. Nutter brought a whole new batch of a couple hundred people into the direct GOTV effort - the stuff that normally gets left to committee people. These are people who never would have imagined doing such work previously because either they trusted the party to do it - or did not realize the importance of this work till they saw a candidate they were really excited about.
Will all of them keep being involved? Probably not but once you see how simple the "science" of getting out the electorate is, the chances are good some of them will do it again if there are other candidates that get them as excited. Brady and Fattah both attempted to pull out their fabled GOTV machines and Knox attempted to purchase one of his own from Blackwell and Dougherty but Nutter succesfully employed one staffed largely by true unpaid vollunteers and won every single ward in West Philly, Noth and Center City. Thats not something to sneeze at. By the old measures of ammounts of signs and ammount of lit and number of sound trucks and number of mail pieces visible in West Philly all 4 of the other candidates should have bested Nutter west of the Schuykill. Instead he won every single ward.
I know the ward system gets sometimes unfairly put down but its pretty obvious from the results of the election that Nutter has shown something to offer the Democratic Party in the ways of a new way to activate and join together parts of its base its clearly lost at least some of its relevance to. If not we would be talking about Mayor Brady or Mayor Fattah or Mayor Evans or Mayor Knox right now. Give credit where credit is due.
Ward system and Mayor
The ward system has not elected a mayor in over 20 years. People know who to vote for for mayor. It did elect Bill Greenlee and others. This is what it does.
Right. And my point is that
Right. And my point is that it could a lot more to help good candidates win in all parts of the state. That's the change I think is most important.
---
Check out my blog!
How would you like
How would you like Democratic CITY Committee to elect Democracts, in say, Perry County? Fundraisers, etc.
Truthtold is right, there is a state party to do this work.
While I think DCC can focus on some regional issues, I'd really like to see its resources and clout go to getting things done in Philadelphia, continue to pull in huge margins for state-wide races (including the Presidential race) and use that clout to get things from Harrisburg and/or Washington, D.C.
As for Brady--didn't he help guys like Patrick Murphy with raising money? Didn't he also assist in booting Santorum.
This is an Expandable Model
Not statewide, but in the near suburbs, where Democrats with help can win, and in state as well as federal races. Heck, maybe local races, too. Anyways, it's more a "what if" idea than a sterling proposal.
Nutter had a great
Nutter had a great organization. That cannot be questioned. However, it cannot also be questioned that he, as well as every other successful mayoral candidate won his race by having good media. And I think that the rumor is true that Brady told people that if they couldn’t sway their votes to Brady, they should give them to Nutter. I’ve heard it from multiple sources.
People who love Nutter fail to realize that he has benefited greatly from the system in which they hate. Brady and Campbell were Ward leaders in his district, and they have supported him through the years. Brady and Nutter respect each other a lot. You can see that by how they interacted in public.
charlesdog: It's nice to see someone finally get that right
After I broke the story, it was immediately distorted by other media and Brady's opponents into "Brady has released ward leaders to Nutter." I remember Vernon Odom saying, "It's been reported that Brady has released ward leaders to support Nutter...." This was picked up by other stations, on the radio etc. etc. Brady's opponents were saying there was a secret deal with Nutter. Brady was understandably furious.
Yours is the first time I've seen it described accurately since my initial report: "Brady told people that if they couldn’t sway their votes to Brady, they should give them to Nutter." That is a far, far cry from "releasing ward leaders." Brady didn't want to give up a single vote, but where voters flatly refused to back him, it made sense to steer them away from Knox.
But I'm not sure how true this is, Charlesdog
Brady and Nutter respect each other a lot.
In his Inquirer endorsement interview, Nutter answered the question of whether he'd support Brady as being the Party chairman by saying, repeatedly, something to the effect of: "the Party needs to change."
It seems that Nutter has now changed his perspective? And despite claims that there was no deal, one has to wonder why Nutter's perspective changed that dramatically in such a short period of time.
Which raises a couple of questions. Did Nutter trade "reform" for votes? Was Brady being deceptive when he denied that he released ward leaders to vote for Nutter- if Brady said what Cout says he said, then why didn't he just admit it publicly rather than try to paint a different picture?
Is it possible that our politicians are being less than fully transparent?
I didn't vote for Nutter to
I didn't vote for Nutter to change the dem party in Philly. If he told Brady he can run the committee how ever he pleases, it doesn't bother me at all.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"yes adam gave some informative comments but he also seems to sprinkle a little adam dust on it." - merkin
Are you comfortable having voted
for a candidate that may have traded "reform" for votes?
Once again, in his interview, he very clearly indicated that he was in favor of reforming the Party system, and although he was a bit cagey, he was pointedly unwilling to back Brady - even when directly called on his being cagey.
Regardless of the specifics, it seems he may have said one thing about his political philosophy, and done another for political expediency. Doesn't this raise "ethical" concerns for you?
Well, phrasing that question
Well, phrasing that question that way is bad. Saying it that way implies he has traded all reform for votes, which I think is safe to say he obviously is not doing.
Am I ok with him "possibly" telling Brady "support me on the side and I won't stick my nose in the DCC". Yes. I am ok with that.
Now, if he was running for DCC chair and sold out reform of the DCC to become chair of the DCC, then I would be pissed. But he isn't. He was running for mayor and frankly, there is enough on his plant to start fiddling with that situation.
Nutter is not some silver bullet that is going to wave a wand on everything he sees. Other people still need to pick up the slack.
Also, what "reform" of the DCC are we speaking about? I would be interested to know what people think needs to be changed.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"yes adam gave some informative comments but he also seems to sprinkle a little adam dust on it." - merkin
Politics is politics. It
Politics is politics. It still doesn't change the fact that they like each other.
I though that Nutter
I thought that Nutter represents a "no more Philly politics as usual" philosophy?
Yeah, and? Nutter benefited
Yeah, and? Nutter benefited from that system in which he is trying to change, or at least the system in which he says he’s trying to change. That is probably more a political position than a personal one.
And, at the end of the day, it still doesn’t change the fact that Nutter and Brady respect each other.
Well, maybe
but I didn't exactly hear "respect" dripping from Nutter's tone in the interview.
And I just don't get your being so blasé about "politics is politics." Obviously, I have no real proof of anything, but it does look a bit curious.
I'm not particularly
I'm not particularly interested in holding Nutter's feet to the fire on the issue of keeping-vs.-not-keeping Brady as the City Committee chief. In the past, Nutter has been able to work the current system to get good things done (including some real reforms) despite a lot of intransigence on the part of the mayor and other council members. As mayor, he doesn't have enough of a council bloc - or enough of an electoral mandate - to push through his agenda by himself. So yeah, a lot of the system won't change - the voters obviously didn't vote for that in Council or elsewhere. But the political will coming from the mayor's office will take a very different shape, I think.
In the Sunday Inquirer article, I thought there were some interesting tidbits about making the mayor's office more accessible, more accountable, and more open - publishing an annual report on campaign promises, allowing officials to talk to the media w/o mayoral approval, that kinda thing.
On another "reform" front, Nutter helped enable a "no more Philly politics as usual" election, as noted in today's paper; in another year, Fattah and Brady would have been breaking out five or six-figure donations from lobbyists, law firms, and PACs. (This figures into the old "is Nutter pro-corporate?" question raised so many times here. Answer seems to be: sometimes yes, sometimes no.) I think his record on reform gives him a little time before we call bullshit on his still-seven-months-away mayoralty.
***
Volunteering for Michael Nutter
See, this is what I was afraid of
Even though you have been one of the more balanced Nutterites, you're starting to equivocate on Nutter's "reform" agenda.
Nutter ran on a platform of "no politics as usual." He ran on a platform that specifically called for "thowing out" the existing system from City Hall. Who lives in City Hall if not the Party system?
Sure, one could argue about "making deals" for political expediency in order to achieve larger and more important long-term goals. That is a never ending discussion: ends vs. means or means vs. ends.
Ok.
But to say one thing, and then do another, is in a different category as far as I'm concerned. That is an "ethical" issue.
Look, I'm hopeful about Nutter. But I believe that there will be "politics as usual" as long as people tolerate it. If Nutter's supporters make it clear that his support is contingent on his matching his actions with his rhetoric - then there will only be a beneficial result.
And you're absolutely right that Nutter deserves credit
for walking the walk on finance reform. A.B.S.O.L.U.T.E.L.Y.
And that was huge issue for me regarding whether I could vote for Fattah.
City Hall v. Party
These are two entirely different institutions. Surely, many of the players are the same. But cleaning up City Hall is not tantamount to cleaning up the Party. As a result, I'm not understanding this fixation on Nutter using the mayors office to clean up Democratic City Committee. I would surely hope that he would use his authority to make all our city institutions more transparent. But, sadly enough, the party is no such institution. Nutter can only influence the County Committee. The party is not a public institution controlled by the mayor. The next DCC election is in 2010. Brady and all current ward leaders are in until then.
I want to see Nutter start in City Hall, making government more efficient and more transparent. I want us to talk about public financing of elections. And, I want him to take on some substantive issues--like crime!
I do not want him to get into a death-match with Ward leaders--a fight any mayor would surely lose (as again, the mayor does not control the local party). And, I want him to have people buy-in to his agenda. If he were to start DCC bashing now, nothing will get done.
This does not mean that I do not want to see reforms in the Party. Nutter has to be careful to not believe he controls the party. Maybe he and Brady will work something out where the party does, in fact, become more transparent. That is not something the "party" has to embrace. But, if Nutter can convince Bob, anything can happen.
I get that, G.
The aren't one-and-the-same. But they are directly related. There is obviously a relationship between City Hall and the Democratic Party. Given Brady's lack of traction in the election, and the amount of votes that Knox got, it is also reasonable to assume that many citizens connect the Dem Party to City Hall.
Further, again, it isn't just a matter of the specifics as far as I'm concerned. Yes, Nutter won't control the Dem Party structure as mayor, and he has to work with the Dem Party to get goals accomplished.
It's the possibility that Nutter cut a deal out of political expediency that I'm talking about.
So, no "fixation" with Nutter cleaning house in the Philly Dem Party.
Let me repeat. In his interview, although pressed on his being cagey, he clearly implied that he would not support Brady as Party Chairman. Now, after reports that indicate it is questionable as to whether or not there was some kind of a deal struck, Nutter seems to be taking a different tack.
No proof of anything. But I'm only asking questions. And the rationalizations I'm hearing don't bode well as far as I'm concerned. My main concern all along was whether Nutter's supporters would be open-minded or partisan in evaluating his actions.
Was this interview prior to
Was this interview prior to the election? If so, I would imagine he did not want to be deemed giving another candidate support for anything related to an executive position. And, if he said "yes", then he could be criticized by Knox for being more of the same. If he said "no", then he aggravates the wheels of the machine. Ambiguity seems to have served him well.
Related to your concern:
Obviously, as a "Nutter-Butter" I am partisan. When he is mayor, however, I will hold him under the same microscope that I hold John Street, Ed Rendell or any other elected offical under. He stops being a candidate at that point.
I am ok with "politics" in
I am ok with "politics" in City Hall. It doesn't always have to be a dirty word.
It is the Dirty Politics that were the problem. money funneling to sponsored non-profits, credit cards being paid off or favors, etc.
Personally, I see absolutely no problem with the guy running for the democratic primary ticket coming to an agreement with the DCC chair.
I am concerned about the sphere of influence. I don't count the DCC as Nutter's direct sphere of influence. Again, he has other things to deal with.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"yes adam gave some informative comments but he also seems to sprinkle a little adam dust on it." - merkin
Simply Not Asking for Miracles
I'm not equivocating - I've just never been opposed to pragmatic politics, and I think there is some real worth in a) knowing when to throw your weight around or pick a fight with someone and b) knowing when to make a compromise for the greater good. I think what you're responding to is the fanaticism with which people often argue Nutter's case, as if all of the old feudal overlords of Philadelphia politics are going to scurry away to another city when he takes office. Not gonna happen.
Gaetano's point about "City Hall" being a different, more relevant entity than City Committee is also well taken.
Perhaps
and I don't reject A, or B.
However, again, for the tenth time, I think that saying one thing about your platform, and then doing another out of expediency, can be a significant signal. I honestly hope I'm wrong.
I get that I'm making a bigger deal of this than it deserves, perhaps. And it's just too nice outside to stay here any longer.