Burnt Orange Report

Sex education. That'll win over the vast middle ground Democrats need to defeat Perry, Chris. Get a grip. No wonder no one takes you seriously

Mr. Knight, I invite you to read the full remarks that Chris Bell had for the SDEC. I tried to contact you by email to inform you that the full remarks are up, but unfortunatly the email address you provided didn' work.

I think there needs to be a slight alteration of that comment, Damon:

"unfortunately" = "characteristically"

Why sugarcoat the truth?

;-)

Chris needs the opportunity to put his message directly in front of people. I've heard him talk, and I'm sure that the crowd today was energized by both the message and the delivery. And he has what it takes to do the same thing in front of ordinary voters. But if he doesn't have the resources to bring that message to "the new mainstream" themselves, then there will be lots of misinformed folks going to the polls next year. And that wouldn't be good for our side.

Thanks to Damon for the excellent reporting!

So Chris Bell, who sought and got the support of Austin insiders in his unsuccessful race to keep his congressional seat, is now running as an outsider against those same Austin insiders? Sounds like more of the kind of situational ethics he is so quick to denounce in others.

To all Texas Democrats,

I attended the called meeting of the State Democratic Executive Committee in Austin Saturday, July 9. An SDEC Officer greeted me shortly after I arrived at the Radisson Hotel. He told me that he thought they had an interesting meeting arranged. I climbed the stairs to the 2nd floor Austin Room somewhat hopefully. When I entered the Austin Room about 12:45 p.m., those hopes were diminished. The room was small. There was one microphone in sight, that at the lectern on the dais. It was obviously not intended that there would be discussion and debate among the members. Also on the dais were seats and name placards for 18-20 people, Officers, DNC members, dignitaries, and I don't know what all. Most of the SDEC members seats were seated at tables arranged in front of the dais so that they were facing sideways to the chair, a demeaning arrangement. There were no microphones on the floor. There were two rows of chairs for perhaps 60 visitors. It turned out that these were not enough. Staffers raced around looking for unoccupied chairs. Many people had to stand along the walls throughout the Session.

I took many notes in the preparation of this report. It is long, but I tried to only include the major violations, errors and omissions. I did include some of my own conclusions based on my understanding of the Rules. If good things happened, I missed most of them. If you weren't there, be comforted by the fact that you didn't have to sit through the whole fiasco. If you were there, you know what I mean. I wish to thank those who helped in the preparation of this report. The mistakes are all mine, and I would like to hear about them.

The General Session of the SDEC was scheduled to begin at 1 p.m. At that time, people were still milling around the room and in the halls. The chair made several calls for members to take their places. At about 1:15 p.m., State Chair Soechting called the meeting to order and started down the published Agenda without seeking its approval. No SDEC member called for a point of order. After a few opening remarks, the Chair called for an Invocation followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. There was no protest over these unapproved activities. Next came the Roll Call conducted by Secretary Ruby Jensen. As member's names were called, most responded with "Sustaining member." A few responded with "Here.” At the end of the Roll Call, the Chair declared a quorum present and called the meeting officially to order. The reading and approval of the Minutes of the previous meeting was the next item on the Agenda, but I don't believe that the Minutes were actually read because each member had a copy, and the Chair assumed that they had read them. The minutes were unanimously approved without discussion.

The next item on the Agenda was "Introduction of Special Guest." This turned out to be Senator Eliot Shapleigh. His topic was centered around the advantages of a state income tax to fund education. His presentation was well researched and skillfully presented. It was highly suitable for high school students or for adults not familiar with the subject, but not for this audience of professional politicians and Party officials waiting to do the critical work of the Party. It went on for 45 minutes. Several members left the room, and I saw at least two members fighting off the urge to sleep. One member was reading a book.

The Chair then declared that he was going to do something "A little bit out of order on the Agenda." There was no protest from the members even though the Agenda can not be changed without suspending the Rules. That requires a two-thirds vote. A member, Jimmy Rocha, spoke, but I couldn't hear what he said. At any rate, the Chair ordered a press release, "A little out of order." It was by now, 2:22 p.m.

Next the Chair decided, without protest, to introduce candidates. Fortunately, the candidates were brief.

The duty of the Chair at an SDEC meeting is to preside over the meeting in accordance with Party Rules and Robert's Rules of Order. He should seldom speak except to maintain order and proper procedures. He should never indicate in any way his opinion about a motion unless he leaves the chair. The Chair did not "preside" over this gathering, he lorded over it. He treated the elected representatives of the people as if they were, at best, junior partners. To say that he broke every rule in the book would not be a great exaggeration. Sadly, there was no serious protest from any member. No member rose to his/her feet and called for a point of order or to appeal a ruling of the Chair.

Next came Treasurer Miguel Wise's report, which I couldn't hear well. I heard enough to know that there is danger of a short fall in the budget and the possible loss of a few staff members if money can not be raised quickly. I believe his report was approved without discussion or debate.

At 2:30 p.m. came the Chair's report. It was a 25-minute harangue telling the SDEC members what "we" are going to do and what "you" have to do. It seems the DNC is proposing to fund some staffers for each state. I believe Soechting mentioned as many as four. He said "he" was going to place two of them in the Valley. This seemed to be a surprise to the SDEC members. He said that some "Super Donors" were going to give large sums of money to the Party. One wonders why anyone would give much money to a Party in such straits-unless they thought they were buying something. He ended by telling the members that they were going to have to raise money themselves, and that they needed to study the Party Platform. He was talking down to SDEC members all the way, and they just sat there and took it. One member feebly raised his hand a time or two. Not one member stood up and called out to be recognized as we Democrats should. SDEC members don't see! m to realize that they represent the voters in their Senatorial Districts and are responsible to them. They don't work for the State Chair; he works for them.

Along about here, the Chair asked for a motion to take a break. Apparently someone made that motion. It failed resoundingly. Members were obviously tired and wanted to get finished. Many had probably driven long distances and wanted to get home before dark. But the Chair overruled them and told everyone to take 5 minutes. There was no protest. About 15 minutes later, members were called back to order.

At 2:55(?), we got back to Committee Reports. The Chair called on Ken Molberg, Chairman of the Rules Committee. Molberg's Report was scheduled last, but he grabbed up his papers and went to the podium. He reported on Zada True-Courage's resolution to change CEC quorum requirements. The problem here was that resolutions should first come before the CEC for disposition. The only time a subcommittee should be involved is if the CEC feels more research, study, or other work is needed. All committees of the SDEC are subordinate to it, and the work done by standing or ad hoc committees must be approved beforehand by the CEC.

After Ken Molberg came the Finance Officer, Dennis Speight. I could hear little of his report until the end when he began to harangue members to recruit sustaining members. He, too, was speaking down to them from on high. But no one protested. As long as the Chair and staff members treat SDEC members like unruly children, few of them will be motivated to work harder than they are already doing just to save a few staff positions.

At this point, the Chair arbitrarily suspended the rules again and allowed Donna Beth McCormick to give details on the 2006 Convention Preparations. She talked of a Howard Dean Kickoff and named some dignitaries who have been invited.

At this point, I was trying to hear an exchange between a member and the Chair because there was no provision for Old Business on the Agenda. The Parliamentarian, Corinne Sabo, took the mike and said something to the effect that a spot on the agenda for old business is not required. Be that as it may, the parliamentarian does not make such rulings, but merely advises the chair who then makes the ruling. A member may challenge any ruling of the chair. When this happens, the assembled body must decide whom to support, the Chair or the challenger. It is the members' call and requires a majority vote.

Dennis Teal and Zada True-Courage gave the Grassroots Committee Report. Zada stated that a new Grassroots Training Manual would be out in October. Suggestions are requested. Dr. Teal stated that the Grassroots Committee had recruited 58 sustaining members and suggested that it was the duty of members to do likewise. Perhaps that is true, but the first duty of SDEC members is to those who elected them in their SDs.

A member then stood up and offered to raise $1000 dollars in his SD. He challenged other members and visitors to do the same. A candidate shouted that he would donate $1000 dollars. I saw no more such volunteers.

A Legislative Committee Report was next. The Committee visited several legislators, and there was talk of a Democratic Performance Index (DPI) that, I think, could be used to measure a legislator' performance. If there were other Committee Reports, I didn't hear them. The background noise was getting fairly intense. I should have risen to a point of personal privilege but failed to do so.

There was no New Business! The Primary Election is less than 9 months away and there was no new business. Is everything shipshape in the SDs and counties? New business should be coming from the grassroots: from the houses, the blocks, the streets, the precincts, the counties, the SDs. Is no new business needed anywhere?

A candidate for the Young Democrats DNC seat asked to speak, and the Chair arbitrarily gave him a minute. Good candidate! He took no more than a minute.

There was one last exchange between a member and the Chair, something to do with ad hoc committees. The member did not rise to a point of information-and the Chair talked down to him. He instructed the member to call him on Monday and said something like "We'll talk about it."

This gathering was not a meeting of a deliberative body with great responsibilities and important work to do. It reminded me of a brush arbor revival or a high school pep rally. There was much shouting and clapping and stomping of feet. There were no motions from the floor other than those entertained by the Chair. Every one of those was passed unanimously without discussion or debate except the one dealing with a break.

We can not expect to have organized precincts and counties without an organized state party. Without that organization, most Democratic candidates will be on their own--or will have to sell out to those who pay their way. Is this truly what we Democrats want? I still have faith that it is not. I believe that most Democrats truly want the things expressed in our Platform-and the opportunity to amend the Platform more to their liking and to help choose candidates . The attainment of Democratic goals is provided for in the law and Party Rules. There are still more Democrats than those of other stripes. But we are unorganized. How do we get organized? It is simple, but not easy. We have to follow our Rules and stand up in righteous indignation when they are broken.

John McConnell, Democratic Precinct Chair

Precinct 3047

Bexar County, Texas

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

John,

Thanks for adding all that great stuff!

John wrote:

"It was highly suitable for high school students or for adults not familiar with the subject, but not for this audience of professional politicians and Party officials waiting to do the critical work of the Party. It went on for 45 minutes. Several members left the room, and I saw at least two members fighting off the urge to sleep. One member was reading a book."

I dont know what part of the room you were at but mine was pretty intrested in the subject. Unless you can come up with a better presintation since it seems you know so much on this subject, or run for state chair.

As I said, Senator Shapleigh's address was interesting and informative, but it was not approved by the SDEC. I was there to watch the SDEC do the vital business of the Texas Democratic Party. The SDEC didn't get around to that business last Saturday. There was no old business taken up nor any new business addressed. The SDEC is the Democratic Party's board of directors. It did little directing. Its members mainly sat there staring up at the august personages on the dias--all 20 or so of them-- like a flock of sheep.