My question for the DPO Chair Race

Steve Bucknum

In about three weeks, the Delegates to the State Central Committee will elect our new officers of the Democratic Party of Oregon. We have four well-qualified candidates (that I know of at this time): Meredith Wood Smith, Carol Voisin, Mac Prichard, and Dan Carol. I will be voting in this election as a delegate from my County. In thinking forward to this election, and what our Party needs, I end up having only one question I need answered.

That question comes in a context. Specifically, I think that the Democratic Party of Oregon is doing a great job of getting out the vote of Democrats, especially in our urban areas – But it is doing nothing to grow the party in the rest of the State. Only token funds were available in rural areas for races this last cycle. There was absolutely no outreach by the Party to independent voters.

We Democrats have a small majority in Oregon’s House and Senate. To keep that majority and enlarge upon it, we will need to start winning more races in areas where we have not been the majority Party. In other words, we need to convince a lot of independent voters and a few Republicans that voting for the Democratic candidates is in their best interests. Otherwise, the current strategy of pumping up the vote with existing Democrats will run its course.

Looking ahead a few years, after the next census in 2010, Oregon will probably get one more Congressional seat. That seat, based on Oregon’s current pattern of voter registration, will probably end up being in the hands of the Republicans. We will probably see that new seat carved out of southern Oregon. Unless we do some pro-active work now, our current 4-1 US House delegation will be a 4-2 delegation.

So, coming back to the election at hand - Candidates for Chair of the Democratic Party of Oregon – I have but one question for you. What is your plan to increase votes for Democrats outside of the urban areas of Oregon?  Please be as specific as possible, and I and others will base our votes upon your response.

(I encourage those of you who are voting delegates to use this space to ask your questions too. Non-voting people, trolls, etc. – please watch and observe. I will delete non-civil comments. I have notified the four candidates that this space is being used for this purpose.)

  • Steve Bucknum (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Just after I posted this, I got an email from Kari indicating that further questions will be asked in a more comprehensive format in a later post.

    So, let's limit this thread to just the content of my question, and then we can do a more extensive Q & A in Kari's later post.

  • (Show?)

    Well, I guess this one's out of the bag now.... It's a worthwhile discussion, so we'll have it now.

    FYI - I've asked each of the four Chair candidates to submit a guest column, which we will run next week. After that, we're going to develop some questions -- tough ones, to be sure -- that will give us all some insight into their thinking. They'll each get a chance to send me a short response, and I'll publish 'em here at BlueOregon.

    Election Day is March 10. Stay tuned. We're going to be all over it.

  • Bucknum Shmucknum (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I've worked on several Oregon campaigns professionally and currently work for an elected official.

    The problem with Bucknum's post is that his premise is wrong. And btw according to your own admission, from my vantage point the DPO is doing exactly what it should be doing - maximizing & delivering the Democratic vote. It's been a pretty good strategy too...Gov, SOS, Treas., AG, Labor Commish, Supt. Public Instruction, and now majorities in the House and Senate. It's great to be amoung friends.

    And as an aside, attend some hearings and you'll find that it's not just about mindless partisan winning as the Keislings, Westlunds, and Gordlys would like to portray. The mood is different. It's positive. Merkley leads by consensus not force...legislators are talking finding about solutions to entrenched problems like education funding, tax inequalities, health care for kids. It's night and day. Ah, back to the topic at hand.

    Party delegates need to recognize that there are opportunity costs to any resource allocation in a campaign. It sounds great to say every county should get more or an equal amount of money but where does it come from? It's also a losing strategy. All counties just aren't equal in vote share or in the path to the majority.

    So Mr. Bucknum given that this is a very narrowly divided state politically -- specifically which races and efforts would you have taken money from to fund "outreach" to people whose voting history, geography, issue beliefs suggest they are unmovable for a Democratic candidate??? How many votes do you need to win a local race of your choosing? And how much would it cost to deliver that vote?

    I agree that the party has a great opportunity to reposition itself with disaffected Rs. Hell, anyone who can't see at this point what a disaster government is with Rs in charge ought not be able to vote! But there is never money to burn in any campaign so you do have to target your resources. I know that's an unpopular sentiment to the Bucknums and LTs of BlueOreogn, but it's reality.

    Your premise also ignores an important division of labor. Candidates and campaigns do the "outreach" to swing voters with a tailored message consistent with their campaign. The party can't really do this credibly. The party mobilizes it's members and then campaigns are able to devote resources to convincing/ converting/mobilizing ANY undecided voters. And these voters are different in every race...Darlene gets Republicans that Brian Clem might never get. Does the party turn that voter out for Billy Dalto?

  • Steve Bucknum (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Well, at least the anonymous person posting above spelled my name correctly. Questioning the questioning is an interesting place to start discussion.

    Ah, the "limited resources" argument. Well, this is about the candidates. They may agree that the resources are so limited that outreach to independents and R's isn't worth it, they may not, or they may have an entirely different take on this.

    Just wait, the candidates should be answering shortly, they have had several days to come up with an answer, as I gave all but Dan about four days to think on it. Dan got less time because I just found out about his running for Chair this morning.

  • Dan Carol (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Hello, I am the last one in, so what the hey -- I will be the first one out to begin this dialogue.

    In my experience, party discussions often tend to fracture around passionate questions about urban v rural, going for base or persuadable voters, focusing on issues v infrastructure and so on. These debates are contentious and horrible. And I love them. :)

    Seriously, for all of these questions we need to find a way to do both, strike a smart balance and not get into either/or questions. As the co-founder of something called the Apollo Alliance, which brings business-labvor-urban-rural together around a Green New Deal on clean energy jobs, I can't help but say that there is a HUGE opportunity for Democrats to lead on clean energy policy (wind, biofuels etc) and put real dollars in rural county treasuries, farmers and ranchers' pockets, community college training and other no-brainer stuff which the public loves. Meeting the energy challenge isn't the whole answer to Steve's question, but I think it's the catalytic glue for creating a new farm-labor-new entreprenerial alliance in the years to come.

    So that's a short start to this big and important question.

    As for the who the heck is Dan Carol question some may be asking, I look forward to answering Kari's questions, wish great luck to my colleagues, and invite folks to visit DanCarolForChair.com

  • Bert Lowry (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Steve has a valid point.

    Speaking as someone who worked his butt off for Paul Evans' Senate race, I would like to have seen some of Paul's resources re-allocated to Jim Gilbertson who ran and lost by 280 votes (out of over 20,000) in rural Central Oregon.

    If I had known how close Jim's race was, he would have received more of my effort. I also think the Bus Project would have done a trip to Madras or Condon for him.

    That was a missed opportunity.

    Jim's district is spread across 9 sparsely populated counties. If his race had been in Washington County, it would have been polled and he would have received a lot of help from FuturePAC, the Bus Project and others. In other words, he would have won.

  • Dan Carol (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Forgive the second post, but I had trouble getting the link up to my campaign site on my fist comment above:

    www.dancarolforchair.com

    For more background -- and broader rants on politics, progressives, issues and grassroots infrastructure, try my personal blog:

    www.kumbayadammit.com

  • frank carper (unverified)
    (Show?)

    If his race had been in Washington County, it would have been polled...

    Or, if Jim's campaign would have done a poll, it would have been polled.

    It hurts to see how close that race was, but honestly: Every year it seems that there's one race that is a surprise heartbreaker. Two years ago, it was Rob Brading.

    The reality is that the candidate is the person first and foremost responsible for their own victory. They should work hard to get help from volunteers, supporters, donors, party committees, interest groups, and more -- but above all else, it's the candidate whose name is on the ballot, and who is responsible for running their campaign.

    I don't know Jim, but I'm guessing he was just as surprised as everyone else that it was that close. If a poll had been done that showed him that close, lots of folks would have shown up to help.

  • Carol Voisin (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Steve, Thanks for the good question! Most of us have attended county fairs through out Oregon. I attended thirteen county fairs as a candidate attempting to unseat Republican Greg Walden. It was during those county fairs and visits with twenty plus Democratic county organizations I began to think seriously about a process that would build the Oregon Democratic Party one county at a time. Most of us know “one size does not fit all” even between suburban counties or rural counties. My dream for the DPO began at a parade and county fair in Joseph riding in Chuck Butcher’s car. I kept meeting smart, hardworking, caring Democrats from Lakeview to Baker City and Medford to Bend. I was deeply moved as I listened to people, their issues, their ideas, their hopes and their fears. It was during a reading of Cowboy poetry that I thought the DPO needs to engage each county on its terms. I know the next question is how you are going to do this. This is my plan.

    • Identify listening teams from the DPO staff to visit each county organization to listen to their needs and dreams. • Assist each county to develop their customized plan that is based on their needs and resources and not on a cookie cutter model. “Get out the Vote” models work well in some counties and not in others. • After each county identifies the support they need to implement their plan, the DPO will provide support needed. • From county plans, move into regions where county resources, ideas, and plans can be shared and supported through a network of communication. • Hold quarterly regional meeting around the state to “showcase” county plans to the rest of the state. • Support Democratic candidates in each and every county based on their Democratic County organizations needs.

    Our county organizations are becoming modern and technologically savvy. All thirty six counties have voices, ideas, great potential candidates and clout. From Indian memorial services, pancake breakfasts and a chatty farmer in Condon I have been moved to strengthen the Democratic Party of Oregon. It is time to take seriously grassroots politics and it is time to increase voters in every single county in Oregon. I know how to do it, because I have done it. For more information go to my website carolvoisin.com, or email me at [email protected] or call me at 541-482-3559. P.S. Welcome aboard Dan!

  • (Show?)

    Polls are costly, and there are numerous campaigns that could not afford to run one. So blaming it on the candidate isn't always the right thing to do -- when given the choice of spending thousands on a poll or on voter contact, you're gonna pick the voter contact when your budget is small. There are a lot of legislative races out there run on less than $30,000 (with a large chunk of that being in-kind).

    For some, a poll could be close to, or more than, half their entire contribution total.

  • Steve Bucknum (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Thanks to Dan and Carol for their posts. Looking forward to reading Meredith and Mac's responses.

    Those of us reading and watching might have follow up questions. I've decided to save mine for Kari's future efforts in covering the DPO Chair campaign.

    Bert and Jenni - thanks for your comments. Perhaps a separate topic on electioneering is needed to cover the direction you ended up going.

  • frank carper (unverified)
    (Show?)

    That's true jenni. But polls don't magically fall out of the sky anymore than direct mail or staff salaries do.

    Campaigns are about making tough choices among competing priorities (like government). Choosing voter contact over a poll is a reasonable choice, but then you can't complain, "But if only we'd had a poll!"

    Jim Gilbertson presumably made a choice - not to have a poll. So it's unfair now, after the results are known, for his supporters to cry out and wish that a poll had magically fallen from the sky.

    If Jim and his team thought it was important, they could have paid for one. If the results were good, it would have paid off. If not, it was a waste of money.

    But hindsight is always 20/20.

  • BlueNote (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I urge support for Carol Voisin. A worthy candidate and someone from outside Portland / Eugene, which is worthwhile for a number of reasons including a need to continue to build a strong Democratic base for a statewide Senate candidate in 08.

  • (Show?)

    Frank--

    I'm not going to get into it here, since it would be off topic. But it's not as simple as you make it out to be. But I will say this...

    We can't keep expecting small campaigns to prove themselves when they don't have the funds to do so. It's a lot easier for an organization that is doing many polls (and repeat customers often get discounts) and has tens of thousands -- if not $100K+ -- to spend the money on a poll than a campaign with less than $30K total contributions.

    Sure, you could spend all your money on a poll. That then isn't convincing enough for support from whichever organization it is you're trying to prove yourself to, and then you're out of luck. Now you have no chance whatsoever.

    I think part of the problem is we need to change the model. We need to work together. The county parties, the state parties, Future PAC, SDLF, and the campaigns need to work together. We need to know what each other is doing. Piggy back when we can. Complement where we can. Stop stepping on each other. Get back to the number one rule I teach my toddler over and over again: share.

    We're a team.

  • (Show?)

    Steve,

    Good questions! Thanks for the post.

    It’s time for the DPO to adopt a 36-county strategy. Such a plan should identify ways to strengthen our rural county parties and build Democratic organizations in the five counties – Grant, Harney, Klamath, Morrow, and Sherman – where we have no local party chairs or vice chairs.

    As a veteran Precinct Committee Person (PCP), I know how difficult it is for Democratic candidates to win without such leadership and structure. It’s the county parties – and the PCPs that power them – that identify the voters and get the ballots in the mail.

    We also need to raise the visibility of Democrats in rural Oregon. The state party should hire a paid communications director to provide practical services to rural areas, such as a speakers bureau, weekly newspaper columns, and research that shows when Republicans vote against the interests of constituents.

    I can help deliver that Democratic message. I’ve been a speechwriter for Governor John Kitzhaber, and a communications aide to Earl Blumenauer. And as a spokesman for three state agencies, I regularly worked with editors and reporters in rural Oregon.

    Finally, our rural county parties need money. To raise it, the DPO should expand the revenue sharing programs I helped introduce as chair of the DPO Finance Committee in 2005. We should also put another house party program in place in 2008 like the ones I created for Howard Dean, John Kerry, and the DPO. Those programs raised $650,000 and supported field offices across Oregon during the 2004 general election, including those in rural communities.

    Keep those questions coming, Steve!

    Mac Prichard Candidate for DPO Chair (503) 913-9382 [email protected]

  • (Show?)

    The vote for the DPO Chair position has a field of worthy candidates. We should all be so lucky.

    In some ways the race reveals the obvious gaps in understanding of county organizations across the state. Carol Voisin already has stated, "one-size-does-not-fit-all." That simple declaration shows how much she does understand the organizational needs county by county.

    Our rural county already does everything mentioned and much more and next door we have two counties struggling to become all they can be and it ain't going to be solved by coffees or LTE groups.

    Look carefully at Carol's ideas. They all begin at the grassroots level. She is not applying a template from urban area successes. Her goal is to restore strength to each county organization based upon their seperate and egually important needs.

    She is the candidate who is embracing a management style that focuses on each county and their identified needs to reform and improve their organization. Her plans involve harvesting what works in each county. Her influence will be statewide while making sure we keep a strong Democratic Party in Oregon.

    Carol recently said, "The Democratic Party of Oregon is simple, yet complex. One rural solution is very different from every other county. Strip away some Democratic enclaves in Ashland or Eugene or parts of the Metro area and there you'll find a very different Democrat who deserves to be heard and taken seriously. I am thankful for all the Democrats across Oregon which means engaging each county on their terms."

  • (Show?)

    First I would like to point out that this not the first time Jim Gilbertson has come with in a few hundred votes of winning House District 59. In 2002 he lost by an even smaller margin. I'm skeptical. The realty is that us out here in the hinterlands are going to have to it ourselves. DPO chair candidates can promise all they want, but it's just talk.......Blah.....Blah.... Blah.......

  • Dave Brown (unverified)
    (Show?)

    We can only hope that republicans are talking about how to win seats in SE portland. Or maybe taking money out of races in Clackamas to spend on races in downtown Eugene.

  • (Show?)

    The Republicans already hold a seat in SE Portland (HD 51). But I'm sure you meant "inner SE Portland," since many seem to forget there's any part of the city (or county) beyond 82nd.

  • Wayne Slawson (unverified)
    (Show?)

    The candidates for DPO chair---all of them---seem to me impressive folks. So far, however, Carol Voisin stands out for me. Others talk about organizing all the counties, but Carol gives us concrete details about how she'd do it. And she's been there! She lost to Walden, but she mounted a great campaign. Who better for chair of the DPO than someone who already has a leg up on all-county organization? This is the strategy that won the 2006 election nationwide; let's do it here in OR with Voisin.

  • Chuck Butcher (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I would not want to be Chair of DPO if it paid really good money, herding cats is not my idea of a pastime. That said, that's the point - herding cats. Not much of a job description, but it's darn accurate. I'm holding my own council on who, but this is the thing to really think about. DPO is a potentially fractious outfit, and that isn't what will work, there is no getting complete agreement, except maybe on thanking H Dean for 50 State, so the question comes down to everybody living with outcomes.

    I have watched some real building go on over the last 2 years, that could evaporate in a heartbeat. I've seen some mis-steps as well. Some things that could have hurt the Party were manuevered (polite wording) and massaged into something livable, that takes skill. There were hurt feelings, but not outright revolt. This vote requires some deep thinking and some political thought, I know, but DPO is raw politics. It is important to know who to go to and who to pet and who to push, oh yeah, some of it's backstage politicing - but that's the game.

    We're fortunate to have these good people running.

  • Meredith Wood Smith (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I believe the two most critical needs to increase our success across Oregon are qualified candidates and quality campaigns. It would be presumptions of me to come up with a complete plan for implementing a strategy to take back rural Oregon, as there are many partners and players who must be included in coming up with such a plan, but as Chair of the Democratic Party of Oregon I will do the following:

    1. Ask the DPO Campaign Committee to survey all our Legislative and many local candidates-both winners and losers- to find out what worked, didn’t work, and identify their unmet expectations, from that a truly relevant plan to support to our candidates can emerge.

    2. Continue to work with all 36 counties in building strong county parties by listening to their ideas and continuing to create relevant and effective training for local Democrats and candidates.

    3. Begin immediately to help local Democrats identify candidates and to find the support needed for their success.

    4. Continue and deepen our partnership with House and Senate Leadership and our state- wide and Congressional candidates to increase voter turn out and build support for candidates all over the state.

    5. Explore ways to identify some “Emerging targets” in some of the more challenging Legislative races (beyond the swing districts). For example we might help them by providing things like a website, training, campaign manager, assistance with a mail piece, volunteer recruitment, etc., that would encourage and support people to run. Having good candidates step up to run is the first step-- giving them the necessary support is the second and most important.

    Blue Oregon has kindly offered to let candidates post a column next week and in that I will address why I am uniquely qualified to carry out the above. Stay Tuned Meredith Meredith Wood Smith, Candidate for Chair of the Democratic Party of Oregon [email protected] 503-318-5043

  • Steve Bucknum (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Well, all the candidates have now answered the question, "What is your plan to increase votes for Democrats outside of the urban areas of Oregon?". I note that Dan, Carol, and Mac answered the day it was posted, and Meredith two days later. All had advance notice this would be posted on Thursday.

    There were some vague answers, some more specific answers, and I think these answers begin to give those of us that will be voting on March 10th a better idea of who these people are.

    I'd be interested in seeing more comments here on what people thought of the answers.

    -- As for Chuck's comment above, Chuck has it about right, herding cats, except for one thing. These cats have ATTITUDE! Whoever wins will need to start with a period of building/rebuilding of the Party. Julius Caesar was stabbed 27 times, and while I don't think it will get that bad, our next leader will have some "interesting" times ahead.

    I'll discuss how I'm going to vote and why later.

  • (Show?)

    So far so good, folks. Let's keep up the good discussion.

  • Meredith Wood Smith (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Steve I answered two days later because I was in "rural" Washington State on a family trip and as you know sometimes Web access is limited or none. If you note the time of my post, I answered your question at 12:28:40 am which is 28 min 40 sec into the second day! Just to keep the counting straight. Sorry for the "delay" but had some business I needed to take care of upon my return before I could make my post. And by the way all cats have attitude! Meredith

  • Zak J. (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Just as the overall Oregon state economy is recovering, rural counties are about to lose the safety net of "county payments" from the federal government that has kept many of them afloat since big timber faded. Even with the unanimous, bipartisan fight being waged by Oregon's entire Congressional delegation to maintain these payments, the money will most likely be gone in another year at the most.

    Democrats ARE competitive in state-wide elections, e.g. Ted K. But if Democrats want to be competitive in every district, we should pursue creative legislative and private solutions to prevent the collapse of services in rural Oregon. This may require a concerted effort to lobby both Democratic and Republican law-makers from more prosperous or urban parts of the state to see the benefit of supporting rural communities. I hope the next chair actively engages legislators and the governor to create a pro-rural Democratic legislative agenda, both for the good of the state and for the party.

  • (Show?)

    Jim Hightower had a great quote from his speech at the recent Spaghetti Dinner fundraiser for the Multnomah County Democrats.

    Paraphrasing: "Those who say that organizing Democrats is like herding cats have never heard of a can opener."

    Whoever wins, give statewide Dems the food they need, they'll follow. Draw your own conclusions.

    <hr/>

connect with blueoregon