Episode Transcript
Speaker 0 00:00:03 And if the freedom democratic not needed, I am confident that the democratic party will reunite on the basis of democratic principles and that together we will March toward a democratic victory in 1980.
Speaker 1 00:00:22 I think the democratic leadership understands that we need to bring those people into the party. We need to transform the party. We need to make the democratic party, the democratic party with a small gate.
Speaker 0 00:00:35 I think the future of the party is working class. And I think that what I represent and, and perhaps, you know, Senator Sanders also Senator Warren, there's a lot of working class champions in the democratic party. And I do think that that's the future.
Speaker 2 00:00:50 Welcome to talking strategy, making history I'm Dick flux activist, retired professor of sociology and a really old
Speaker 3 00:01:02 Guy. And I'm, Dirac Allera more hall, a slightly less old guy, and also an activist and political strategist. And this season on talking strategy, making history, we're going to be talking about one of the big questions for progressive strategy here in the United States, in what we're calling a Hitchhiker's guide to the democratic. Okay. Hey, welcome folks today. We're talking with Jane Clegg, who is the chair of the Nebraska democratic party. And before that, a long time grassroots democratic and progressive activist coming up through the young Democrats and as a, an environmental advocate and champion nationwide, as well as in her adopted state of Nebraska. So thanks a lot for coming on and talking with us, Jane.
Speaker 4 00:02:00 Yeah. Excited to be here. Well, let's
Speaker 3 00:02:02 Jump right in. You know, the purpose of this podcast is to try to add to the discussion on the left in the United States about what to make of the democratic party and how to engage with it strategically. So can you describe your sort of day to day? What do you do as a state party chair?
Speaker 4 00:02:27 Yeah. So each state party kind of runs their infrastructure a little bit differently. And in a lot of the red states, like in Nebraska, I'm a full time party chair that is unpaid. So that's one of the big problems that we have within the party infrastructure is that not enough resources go to our state parties. And so therefore their top leadership it'd be like a CEO or superintendent of a school district not being paid, but still being required to hit all the goals and do all the vision and the plans. And so, but on a daily basis, I managing our five staff members. Uh, we just got finished, you know, creating our finance and outreach plans for 2021 holding calls with party leadership. And of course doing candidate recruitment and candidate training calls and meetings. So you're, you know, it's a constant, um, it's constant action. And then it's also, you know, you're also trying to figure out not only how do you keep your party infrastructure moving forward, but how are you also making sure that you're meeting the community's needs? Like we're doing a meal fundraising program right now to help families that are hurting in these holiday times. So, you know, you're constantly juggling lots of hats. That's interesting.
Speaker 3 00:03:35 And that's one of the themes and we've been trying to tease out, uh, here on the podcast is just how little there is in terms of day to day party development and party, you know, maintenance that, you know, resources going to that versus the, you know, TV ads and campaigning and, and, and so forth when you compare American politics to politics really anywhere else. So that's interesting to know right off the bat that in Nebraska, for example, none of the party officers are paid position, even the chair
Speaker 4 00:04:12 That's correct. And that does have to change if we're serious about winning elections, not only for the president of the United States, but down-ballot, which is obviously critical for each of our states and all the issues we care about climate change, immigration, et cetera, then you need a strong state party infrastructure that can be passed down through different kind of party transitions, which, you know, whether that's for six years when the different party leadership comes in, um, that's not happening right now, mostly because the donors have been sold this bill of goods. From my perspective, you know, over a decade ago when the democracy Alliance and lots of other outside groups essentially were telling all the major donors, the party infrastructure is crap, stop funding it, and let's create center for American progress. That's create, um, America votes and all these outside groups who essentially are doing the functions of state parties. Um, but aren't creating that kind of lasting infrastructure within democratic politics. Well, and also aren't
Speaker 3 00:05:08 Accountable to anything. I mean, at the end of the day, you have to run for reelection as party chair. Your state party has a platform that I assume members and clubs and so forth gets some kind of say in, and all, it seems like all of these organizations that get started parallel to the party kind of replacing party apparatus are also just kind of professional operations with no democratic participation or accountability.
Speaker 4 00:05:36 Yeah, that's right. And they can choose which races they want to get involved in and which ones they don't want to get involved in. As I say, party, I have to support every single Democrat on the ticket, whether it's a long shot or whether it's going to be a two point race. And if we just started to get serious, like I love all the progressive groups. I run a progressive group, bold Nebraska. Um, you know, I have to have a plan full-time paid job, right? So I, where I have to have two full-time jobs. But, um, you know, if we actually started to focus again, for example, on party, on voter registration, again, a decade ago, uh, all the groups essentially were told democratic state parties and the DNC shouldn't be doing voter reg. So that's a function that 5 0 1 C3 and five one C4 groups can do. But the problem is then the brand of Democrats is not in the streets at that earliest moment when you're getting voters to decide if they're going to become a party voter for life. So that's awesome. That's something concrete and maybe a one-off, but critical to party building into creating relationships with voters longterm
Speaker 3 00:06:39 And there's does Nebraska have partisan voter registration?
Speaker 4 00:06:43 We do. We have partisan voter registration. Um, we have a great actually vote by mail program even before the coronavirus. It was a strong program that the Democrats really utilized to help win elections. I got
Speaker 3 00:06:54 One more question to get some basic things out there, and then I'll turn it over to Dick. But as a progressive, as a, as a leftist, as someone who comes out of, uh, you know, supported Bernie Sanders and has been involved in the, uh, you know, sort of post 2016, uh, Sanders legacy organizing or activism, what, what difference do you make as a progressive being in that position in, in the state party? Or what, what difference does it make to have Progressive's in, uh, positions of power within the party organization? Since, as we, we just said, you know, the party organization gets kind of ignored and, um, is that the redheaded stepchild of American politics? Why does it matter to have people with good, progressive transformative politics in those positions?
Speaker 4 00:07:46 You know, I think it's critical for this really basic reason. And if you're looking at the national stage, the fights between kind of establishment, more moderate Democrats and AOC, you know, it's embodied in AOC, right? But AOC is like the placeholder for progressives and new ideas, if you will. Um, it's, it's important to have progressive leaders at the top of these infrastructures because I then am able to actually embody and actually put in place the word unity. So oftentimes when moderate and more establishment Democrats use the word unity, they essentially really mean Progressive's give up your ideas and your push for different policies, whether that's, you know, infrastructure policies that we want changed in the party reforms or actual policies on climate change and come to our middle ground and their middle ground is always on their terms. But as a progressive, as I lead the state party, I've really led with a mantra of all shades of blue are welcome in our party. And that includes yes, the conservative Navy blues, but it also includes the pride turquoise blues, and that both of those ideas is actually what's going to make our party stronger. What frustrates me the is that when I hear folks saying that we can't run on progressive issues in conservative areas, um, and vice versa, right? The problem with that is when you have both progressive and moderate Democrats in a room talking about a policy and makes that policy stronger, not weaker. And that is the difference between us and the Republican party as well. You brought
Speaker 2 00:09:17 Up that issue of, uh, shades of blue and how to, how they can relate to each other while they're in disagreement and conflict. That's I think an important thing for us to focus on right here. So you're in a, uh, classic red state, supposedly stereotypically, um, although you Omaha, uh, and surroundings had its own single electoral vote, which went for Biden. We can talk about that, but, um, do you, how much credibility do you think is there? And the argument that the language of black lives matter and other social movements of the left damaged, the chances of Democrats running in swing districts or in a red state areas,
Speaker 4 00:10:06 I just don't buy it. And it was interesting to me because a progressive paper that we all love five 50 and posts of progressive site kind of use this narrative that a position that the state party took, which we condemn one of our own, a democratic county attorney who treated James Scurlock, a young African-American, who was killed by a white racist bar owner, uh, during a black lives matter protest. We condemned the actions of the county attorney and the language that he was using as he was describing James Scurlock. A lot of our moderate establishment Democrats got very upset with me, said that I was going to cost Biden and Kara Eastman, the election, um, you know, Biden won with huge margins, uh, in the electoral vote and Clara Eastman, the progressive candidate, uh, she did lose. And it wasn't because, uh, the state party took a stand on our core values of justice and standing with our black brothers and sisters.
Speaker 4 00:11:00 Um, it was because Kara in, you know, progressive can hate me for this, but she didn't fit the district. You know, CD two is a more kind of moderate district. And if you have progressive values and progressive stances, you also have to prove to those voters that you aren't going to represent them. When you go to Congress, just like you're going to represent the progressive part of the base. And Carra, wasn't able to bridge that. That's, that's like the critical component. I'm a progressive on the Keystone XL pipeline fight. The one that we've led now for the past decade in our state to stop that risky pipeline. If I were to have walked into a room of conservative farmers and ranchers on day one, when we were creating those relationships with them saying, unless you're fighting Keystone only because of climate change, you're not invited to participate in this fight with us because that's why I care about this issue. No, that's not what we did. We went into that room. You're in this fight because of eminent domain, you're in this fight because of water tribes, you're in this fight because of your sovereignty rights. I also care about climate change. It's going to take all of those issues and all of our faces and all of our voices in order to win. And that's what we have to do as Democrats.
Speaker 2 00:12:09 So you tying the interests and needs of whatever community you're talking with to an issue, uh, helps make those bridges and makes for the kind of unity that you were talking about. That's what I think you just said. So, so that battle, which is a remarkable one, it has there been, uh, a way in which that unity has spilled over into other, other coming together in more rural parts of
Speaker 4 00:12:38 Nebraska? Yeah. Immigration is the other big issue. So both climate change and the development of clean energy and stopping risky fossil fuel projects, immigration, and then fighting kind of corporate ag monopolies. Those three issues are where Democrats stand with rural voters. Our platform stands with the rural voters, the issues that we care about the policy stances that we take, but yet, because of not enough Democrats actually step foot into rural communities and talk to rural voters about these issues. There continues to be this big divide in rural voters thinking that Democrats actually aren't on their side. Um, when in fact, you know, we're the one stopping Costco from building massive chicken barns and hurting small producers or stopping pipelines from taking land from farmers and ranchers with eminent domain. So as Democrats, we can still hold our deep, progressive values and still connect with more conservative and moderate voters, whether that's suburban, rural or urban voters, if they trust us.
Speaker 4 00:13:38 And that means being honest. So when we say black lives matter, and we deeply believe that as a party, we also have to not waiver on that. When I see people trying to then kind of do this weird dance in essentially, you know, get really defensive that, that, of course we support our police. Of course we support our police and firefighters that, that, that doesn't have to happen in a vacuum. And when Democrats start to get wishy-washy, or if voters start to see that they're trying to play both sides of the fence, that's when you lose trust, that's when you lose credibility and lots, when you lose the votes. So
Speaker 2 00:14:17 Bold, am I right that bold Nebraska, the organization that you had that you mentioned alongside of being chair of the party, its agenda or its focus is precisely the kind of links to, or communications and connection with rural parts of the state. Is that, is that the agenda?
Speaker 4 00:14:35 Yeah, we started in 2010. We didn't start as a pipeline group. We started right after I was the lead staff member to get Obamacare passed. We were, we ran a whole organizing campaign for two years to get Senator Nelson's vote. So after that, I really realized that there was so much in common between our rural communities and our urban communities in our state that I wanted an organization that was going to continue to work on issues and bridge that divide and the Keystone XL pipeline came up, obviously was the perfect kind of embodiment of an issue that could, you know, bridge that big gap between urban and rural, uh, if you organized. Right. And that's exactly what we did. So
Speaker 2 00:15:16 Talk about the longer term consequences of that in terms of the link, you know, what what's there now that wasn't there before in terms of organization and alliances and linkages?
Speaker 4 00:15:29 Yeah. So one, I can walk into a room of kind of rural farmers and ranchers, or just rural folks that aren't involved in ag. Uh, and they know that I don't have horns and a tail, um, because they've seen me as somebody who is standing next to them when they're hurting, when even Republican governors, you know, weren't coming to their aid to protect their property rights and their water. Um, so that is really important. And Jesse Jackson did that in the eighties when farmers were facing the farm crisis, you know, he went to rural communities and said, you know, the way that we're going to get real economic and racial justice is if we unite the eaters and the feeders, and went into tractor brigades, you know, with the farmers and ranchers, that's what I want to see. I want to see, you know, Joe Biden, Kamel Harris coming into rural communities when there's major floods, when there's, you know, immigration issues and immigration raids, which are happening all the time in our rural communities. I also want them to come so we can show all the creativity and innovations that are happening in rural communities that really can be solution providers, especially around climate change and, and getting small producers to get a bigger piece of the pie when it comes to agriculture money. So showing up is obviously a huge part of the process that we have to do as Democrats.
Speaker 2 00:16:47 And you're seeing the consequences politically or electorally already from this work.
Speaker 4 00:16:52 That's right. And it's a long haul. You know, I won't sugar coat it. I mean, we had 550 Democrats run in Nebraska in 20 20, 70 1% of those Democrats won. And that wasn't only in Lincoln and Omaha that was across our entire state, but we also lost a critical state legislative race in our rural community. Our, one of our incumbent state senators lost, and they just buried him in all of this negative mail, you know, using the typical, he knows a radical communist socialist, um, and our state party didn't have enough money to fight back early in the way that they kind of rebranded our state Senator. Who's a union member in a hardworking kind of like working class, um, you know, representative of in our state legislature. So when I see money being spent in all these outside groups that have 20, $30 million create all these new online ads and all this other stuff, which I know is important, but what I needed, I needed $20,000 to do radio ads to push back against what the Republicans were lying about on our state Senator.
Speaker 4 00:18:04 And I went knocking on every single national party committee's door, and I couldn't get that $20,000. I couldn't get $50,000 from the Biden campaign to run a more aggressive vote by mail program in <inaudible>, which was a district. We also thought we could win with an electoral vote. So when we're talking about nuts and bolts, we have to decentralize, uh, vote by mail voter registration, that all those resources that are being spent at the national level, a lot of that has to start getting spent now at the state and local level where we construct that dollar better.
Speaker 2 00:18:38 So what is your, uh, diagnosis or analysis about why that resistance from the national sources of funding sources?
Speaker 4 00:18:47 I think some of it's because when people get into a room and they look at a map, they look at states like Nebraska, Iowa, South Dakota, and they think it's hopeless. Right? If you just looked at our state's party voter registration, you would think there's no way we're going to win any elections. But if you had more rural voices in the room, when those decisions are getting made, we can show you the possibilities. Right. You know, Texas can obviously talk about the possibilities of their state. I can talk about the possibilities of Nebraska and other rural states, but right now, if you look at the DNC party leadership, all people, I deeply respect, but there's not a single one of them who live in a rural community in who live in a red state who can show how you can win in those states if they actually had the resources. So that is representation really matters, right? Gender representation, racial representation, and geographical representation matters for our state party infrastructure.
Speaker 3 00:19:44 So do you have friends, would you, I mean, do you, that's a weird way to say it, but do you feel like there are other folks in positions of leadership and state parties around the state, um, or at the da, like as elected members of the DNC who share your perspective, your vision?
Speaker 4 00:20:02 Yes. Um, you know, Tina, pat allow ski in Washington state, obviously a pretty bright blue state. Um, she shares this value, Ken Martin and Minnesota Ray Buckley and New Hampshire trout Robinson and South Carolina, honestly, there's maybe a handful of state chairs who don't feel this way. Um, but it's this weird, it's always this very bizarre in, in right now is exactly, uh, really the perfect time to actually describe this as state party chairs. We also believe very deeply in the institution, in the establishment of our party, right? We're in these positions because we believe in that institution. And so right now, you know, there should be a race for DNC chair in a race for all of those party leader positions, uh, according to our own, you know, party bylaws, but because of tradition and because of the respect that we give kind of to our elders, if you will, um, you know, we're while waiting for vice president Biden and Kamala Harris to tell us who they're choosing, and it's a really dangerous kind of place for our party to be because that's exactly what Barack Obama did. And that's exactly when we lost 1200 to 1400 races. Down-ballot because they prioritized winning the white house, not winning the entire democratic ballot. I wish we were having competitive races right now for the national party leadership, because these are the conversations that we should be having in our party and the direction that our party is going to take.
Speaker 3 00:21:32 I only really seen that. I mean, in the modern postmodern era, uh, a real politicized, uh, fight for DNC chair, uh, when Dean ran
Speaker 4 00:21:45 That's right and Perez and Ellison, you know, there was a fight there and Ellison obviously came very close, but those were the last two times in the last 50 years of our party. That's a problem,
Speaker 3 00:21:59 You know, I don't want to get into the horse trading stuff, but, um, who'd you like to see in that position and is, is there any discussion about, uh, names that activists and, uh, interested, uh, stakeholders could get behind?
Speaker 4 00:22:15 You know, Jamie, Harrison's obviously the name that, uh, is really the only name that is being floated right now by representative Cliburn and folks from the Biden team. You know, haven't totally said no to that, right? So collaborating obviously carries a lot of weight within our party, even before everything that he did for vice president Biden. And Jamie Harrison is somebody that state party chairs can absolutely rally behind. He was a state party chair, right? From a red state. He was a candidate, obviously that race had all the resources they possibly could need. And Jamie couldn't get over the finish line, but it also, he also understands then what it's like to be a red state candidate, which is very critical kind of knowledge base and skills to have as a chair of our party. So we all are very much in support of Jamie Harrison as being chair of the party. We also then want to make sure that our vice chairs are representative of the entire United States. And don't just come from DC, California, even though I'm sorry, California, New York, which is, which is mostly where our vice chairs and party leadership do come from.
Speaker 2 00:23:20 Well, this is so, so that's a likely outcome though, but Harrison coming into that position, is that
Speaker 4 00:23:26 What you're? I think it's a very likely outcome, um, as state party chairs and vice-chairs, we submitted a letter to vice president Biden and Harris, uh, laying out the qualities of a chair that we wanted and Jamie fits all of those qualities. One of the most important things too, is that we actually get back the 57, uh, state party and territory strategy, which was a strategy not developed by team developed by Ray Buckley, the chair of the New Hampshire democratic party. You know, our state parties used to be getting $25,000 a month to help provide for partying infrastructure staff positions. And then that went down to 2,500 under president Obama. It's back up to 10,000 under Perez, but if we're serious about winning elections and if that's what the democratic party's mission is to do, uh, then we need the money to actually do that. Okay. But
Speaker 3 00:24:19 I really want to, I really want for our listeners to underline and put in context what you're saying there in terms of those dollar amounts. So th there has been an, I remember this as a, as a state party officer here in California, talking with staff about what was going on with support from DNC. And, and to be honest, like we don't in California, we don't necessarily need that. You know, uh, uh, a $2,500 check every month is kind of a drop in the, in the ocean 25. Well, whatever it was lowered down to, um, it wasn't going to be a lot, we could build program around, but of course it was helpful, but the point being, it costs in, uh, the county that, uh, Dick and para and I all live in, um, if you want to run a successful county supervisor race, you need several hundred thousand dollars.
Speaker 3 00:25:13 The candidate would need that to spend and on. So that's for, uh, a seat, uh, of one out of five legislative seats for the county of Santa Barbara in California. And that campaign would probably have four or five, uh, full-time staffers, and then tons of, uh, of, of activists and organizers, you know, working on the ground, talking to voters and so forth. Meanwhile, what Jane's talking about is a, a state party operation in Nebraska, um, for a state and regardless of population, this is still a state that gets two senators and, um, sends members to Congress and so forth and not to mention sets policy for its own citizens. And you have four or five staffers at that, at that level. And the national party is debating whether or not it can afford a contribution to the state party level. Um, that still is a fraction of what is spent on a local election here in Santa Barbara.
Speaker 3 00:26:19 And it's really remarkable for all the things that we expect the democratic party per se does or should do for all that. We expect a state chair to be responsible for. I'm sure you get lots of hate mail about this city council, plus what, whatever Obama did, plus whatever, um, is going on, uh, in Washington, all of that together, when you compare just dollar dollar, what is spent on these temporary fights in temporary infrastructure, around an election versus what we're giving to, you know, building longterm or having a strategic outlook or anything is just, it's just really outrageous.
Speaker 4 00:27:00 Yeah. There's just no question about it. And if you just kind of look at it, I always use like the teacher in school analogy, it would be like us telling a public school, you know, where we send our kids to go to school. That teachers, that school is that is not going to get any funding that yes, the building is there, but they're not going to get any funding to make sure that they have, you know, teachers getting health insurance and teachers getting paid and having the school supplies. That's essentially what the national party tells state parties is. You're on your own. Uh, you need to raise your own budgets. And if we're part of one infrastructure family, and if we're responsible for actually implementing kind of policies and we're responsible for communicating the messages and brand of our party, we should be well-resourced and we need less staff members in Washington, DC, and more staff members on the ground in our state parties.
Speaker 4 00:27:54 For me, that's really the bottom line and that's true to win congressional races, state legislative races, city council races. And as you brought up the Senate, cause I know sometimes people in more urban states are like, screw rural America. You guys are backwards and are always voting for the wrong people. You know, that may be true in a lot of our communities because the Democrats have abandoned rural voters and haven't been creating those bridges, but the bottom line is they still get two us senators. And so in 10, 15 years, the vast majority of the us Senate is going to be represented by rural and conservative states. Um, and less we get our act together as Democrats.
Speaker 2 00:28:32 And may I add that I'm old enough to remember that some of those states, I think including Nebraska had a history of populism and, and, and, and popular, um, more progressive, uh, elected, you know, senators and people like that, uh, who were important figures in the national political arena across the Prairie states and, uh, that memory, uh, might be worth remembering for, for some people who are writing off rural America. So one of the things I've learned just doing these podcasts is, um, kind of, kind of capsulizing what we've, what we've been hearing so far here is that the future of the party and the future of progressive, uh, influence over the party, uh, combined in a strategy to organize in 50 states, not to write off constituencies, but to, uh, organize toward those constituencies, not by moving to the center necessarily at all in terms of policy, but by trying to find ways in which people can unify around issues that are, uh, involve structural change or challenge to corporate power, am I sort of stating where you
Speaker 4 00:29:47 Are 100% in our small rural towns, they hate big, they hate big corporations that come in and try to tell their communities had a act or look like they don't like, you know, big pipeline companies that come in and try to take their land away by eminent domain. They don't like big corporate ag who try to come in and tell them how to run their small family farm or ranch, or what feed they have to buy in order to then sell their product, you know, to the meat packing. So there is we, we can create bridges with our rural communities and still hold our progressive values. And we should never as Democrats believe that we can't do both because we can, when we don't do both, that's when we lose their trust. And that's when they fall back to the comfort zone of guns, abortion, and other cultural issues. Right.
Speaker 2 00:30:36 So, um, but you represent as well, this into sort of autonomous organization. And we talked when you started the conversation here, you said that the party officially kind of let these, uh, NGO, nonprofit groups, uh, take over some of the functions that the party should do. So how, what is the relationship between bold Nebraska and the democratic party? You're, you're there as the head of both, but why do you still need both? Well, you explain how these work together and could work together because we've got a lot of these organizations all over the country. Now, polar, I mean, in Georgia, there must be 50 separate organizations, not called democratic party that are all working in this current election campaign, uh, in coalition. But, uh, what's wrong with that? Or how does that operate in a way that's functional for everybody?
Speaker 4 00:31:32 Yeah. I definitely do want to see, you know, the C4 groups kind of sitting at a table with democratic party groups in order to win elections. And obviously legally there's some coordination you can do in some you can't. So I won't get into the weeds on the legal part, but to speak more generally. Um, when we are talking about reaching, for example, Latino voters in Nebraska, um, we have a responsibility as a party to create, and we did candidates of color funds. So more Latinos and African American native American Asian Americans are having early money to run. So we've started that, but there's a lot of Latino grassroots groups, like the Heartland workers center that has deep roots in the community that we can partner with in order to do joint voter registration in order to do canvassing. So there's, um, faces that they trust, uh, in addition to democratic canvassers.
Speaker 4 00:32:24 So, you know that I want to see more of that, but I also want to be very clear that what I'm speaking to also to the major donors out there and kind of the major decisions that get made on, uh, on the big funding level is that we can't continue to starve state parties and then tell them that they have to win elections. Um, I think all of the C4 C3 groups are great and those should continue to get the funding that they need and deserve. And we also have to make sure that state parties are getting real resources so they can run real programming.
Speaker 2 00:32:57 What must the parties do on the state level that they're not doing and that these other organizations can't, or shouldn't be doing,
Speaker 4 00:33:06 I think every single state party, and this may sound so simplistic, but to everybody listening, this is not happening right now. I think every state party across the United States should have at least five staff members. They should have at least a budget of $2 million a year. They should be able to run aggressive voter registration, vote by mail programs. They should also be able to run. We call ours a block captain program, but a precinct or a block captain program. And then the fourth thing that they should be able to have the resources for is essentially a slate card, right? So in Nebraska, when I became chair, we weren't doing that, uh, for the past two election cycles we have, and it's helped us win down ballot. So it's a slate card specifically for each county where it lists all the Democrats that are running, that you will see on your ballot, whether it's a partisan or nonpartisan race. So you know, who the Democrats are, those core functions that I just described, those are not happening in every single state. There are many state parties that don't have a single paid staff member. Um, so it is a real problem, uh, for us winning elections and winning these us Senate races, for example, and
Speaker 3 00:34:13 In my experience, you know, coming up around the same time or yeah, and overlapping with, uh, with you, your career in the, in the democratic party, Jane, is that getting the party to do those things takes activism from below and, you know, in California, it's obviously the cliche is that it's a nation unto itself, but that's actually helpful. Um, because a lot of what you're describing about the relationship between the national party and state parties, um, you can see in the relationship between our state party and our county parties. And, uh, and we have many counties in California where, uh, the county party does a great job is very, uh, you know, has a good, robust voter contact operation, which means that when Progressive's get, get power in it and, and control its endorsements, that it can, the, the, you know, progressives can sort of point the, the, the ship point, the apparatus in a progressive direction.
Speaker 3 00:35:21 And it actually has an apparatus. So one of my mantras here in, on the podcast and in my work right, is trying to convince progressive activists that they have to do a kind of double duty of both moving the party to the left and influencing its policies and the candidates, but also just to building the party per se, just building it. And, and, and, uh, to the point that it can talk to voters, turn out voters and actually influence politics. And so here's my frustration. And I throw this out because you've been on the board of, uh, of Orr and we had a great interview and conversation with David du holiday, uh, about a month ago, um, and got into some of the organizational history, but we need some people out there, an organization out there that's making that case and helping people and training people Progressive's to lead the party. And I feel like from what I saw between 2016, and now that Orr kind of said they were going to do that, but really haven't, um, and, and that need is still there. And I'm wondering, w you know, can you fill in some, some gaps from a national perspective what's going on there
Speaker 4 00:36:38 It's such a huge need. And this is something that, you know, all of my brothers and sisters on the board, Jim Hightower, and I sing from this same choir book. Uh, we need some staff at the national art rep that are actually have history in state party and national party organizing that are then focused on this, because right now, our staff are really focused on kind of issue building, and then particularly particular candidate races that they're engaged in, obviously need to turn and will be a big race now that are revolutions involved in. And so it's been a kind of bullet point of our mission, but we've never stacked it or fully funded it. Uh, we certainly did some funding around, uh, supporting the unity reform commission and did a lot of organizing around that to get those policies through. But, um, you're right. Activists, if you're not, if you've never been involved in young Democrats or college Democrats or county or state party politics, you have no kind of understanding or even respect for the amount of work that happens in the intern internal party organizing.
Speaker 4 00:37:39 So you then can have a robust canvassing and strong candidates win elections, um, getting in those institutions, which honestly, if you just start to volunteer, you start to kind of make your way through the leadership ranks pretty quickly, because a lot of county and state parties are really hungry for activists, people who want to help. So if you want to make a real difference in your state, uh, democratic politics, get involved at the county level and work your way up to the state central committee, and then run for kind of a party officer position. You can make significant change that way. Um, but this is a failure of our revolution. Uh, there's no question about it. It's something that we need to change. Absolutely. You know, and if our revolution is not going to do it, then some other organizations should, because, uh, this is a place where Progressive's, this is how you can create real infrastructure change is through party infrastructure. Well,
Speaker 2 00:38:34 I'm finding this exciting talking to you because your, your vision and your, and your fusion of that with, with practical reality is, uh, terrific. And we haven't let you get a chance to promote what sounds like a really important book that you're just come out with called harvest the vote, how the Democrat what's, the subtitle,
Speaker 4 00:38:56 How Democrats can win again in rural America.
Speaker 2 00:38:59 All right. So, uh, tell us about the book, what, what what's in, what's in the book that you haven't already revealed?
Speaker 4 00:39:06 Well, the first couple of chapters actually talk about our journey of Keystone XL. I really could have written, you know, one or two books just on that journey alone, but I really give specific stories on how we bridged the unlikely lions of farmers, ranchers, tribes, and environmentalist, all working together. I tell stories of, for example, the Ponka sacred corn that we plant inside the Keystone route, and that, you know, we could have had diversity training with, you know, flip charts for farmers or ranchers and tribes to bridge cultural differences. Uh, and I think we would have failed if we did that instead, we built trust and learned about each other and broke down stereotypes that we had through action. And I essentially make the case to the democratic party. That that's exactly what we need to be doing as Democrats, that the same organizing that we're doing on issues. And a lot of groups are doing out there on issues. Uh, we need to take those steam tactics, uh, and organizing style and bring that into democratic politics. So the second half of the book is all specific reform ideas that we can do inside the democratic party. Well,
Speaker 2 00:40:13 Uh, maybe we should offer that book to our listeners somehow. I mean, first we should read it.
Speaker 4 00:40:19 It's a good grade. It's a quick read
Speaker 2 00:40:22 It's it's, uh, Harper Collins publishing, and, uh, it's available in the usual places. Uh, and I, I, you, you said that you told us before that you were actually able to be on bill Maher's program talking about the book, but then things have sort of, it's been hard, much harder now in this environment to, to get around and promote the book. Of course, but here we are doing it. I think we should do it. I mean, I'm eager to get it. I will get it today. Absolutely.
Speaker 3 00:40:51 Well, Jane, is there anything, anything else you'd want our listeners to know to think about? Um, we, we're trying to build an audience, uh, nationwide for folks who want to, uh, stop having the argument about whether or not progressive should engage with the democratic party and move on to the how, um, so any, any last messages along those lines, you'd like our listeners to think about.
Speaker 4 00:41:17 I think, you know, just the one that's immediately in front of me, which is the DNC leadership, cause that'll steer the direction for the next four years of our party. So, you know, I really encourage folks to really push on Twitter, Facebook, um, you know, vice president Biden that we really elect vice chairs that reflect the geographic racial diversity of our party and that we don't just, uh, kind of choose one ideology in those vice chairs. That's going to be critical because if we don't have a diverse vice chair, uh, pool of candidates and people that get put into those positions, then we could fall victim to the same path that the DNC took under president Barack Obama, where we were only worried about the white house and we just completely got obliterated at the state level. So that's my ask is that we really push to get strong vice chairs. If Jamie Harrison is going to be our chair strong vice chairs to help support him, that really represent both wings of our party, not just one wing. And
Speaker 2 00:42:19 The idea of that, having a party of both wings, or I like to talk about a people's party, that's the way I would define a what the goal of the podcast is. And it sounds like you are a champion of that, not only where you are, but getting a national voice for the, for that kind of idea and that vision for which we are most grateful. Thanks guys, really appreciate it. Hope to keep following your work
Speaker 5 00:42:48 And fossil fuel. Draw the line before we bill PI and fracking. Now let's save the water.
Speaker 3 00:43:05 Hey everyone. Thanks so much for tuning into our little podcast here. If you want to hear more and support us as well as get access to full length interviews and other goodies, you can support us at patrion.com/t S M H
