I returned to the Florence Area Democratic Club in January. The new chair was a friend. Last year’s chair had stepped down. I wrote three letters during the year. The first one, written in January, was a response to three letters printed in the local paper.
***
Several interesting letters appeared in the Jan. 6 edition of the Siuslaw News.
Jenny Velinty [a FADC member] deplored observing in 2013 “a fast-spreading contagion with no antidote, no cure and no remorse” -- hate. She advised: “Learn all about an issue before voicing an opinion based on rumor and false facts.”
Tony Cavarno regurgitated lies about Benghazi, “Fast and Furious,” and the IRA investigations of Tea Party groups that Fox News repeatedly states as fact. Anything to attack the President.
George Goldstein fulminated that the Florence Area Democratic Party (FADC) and State Representative Caddy McKeown have co-conspired to deprive local non-Democrats the opportunity this Saturday (today) to hear her speak. “She apparently thinks that she only represents select Democrats and doesn’t want people to know what is going on in the legislature or to listen to them.”
In her editor’s note Theresa Baer explained the reason for the meeting’s different location. She clarified that the public is invited (FADC meetings are always open to the public), and informed that the FADC business will follow Rep. Mckeown’s presentation. Anybody may leave the meeting at any time.
I was Chair of the FADC, minus five months, from 2007 through 2012. We sponsored many town halls at which our elected Democratic state legislators spoke and took questions from their constituents. Occasionally, we invited these legislators to attend our club meetings. Why? We liked them, they were interested in what we were doing; we enjoyed their input. The get-togethers were as much social and informational. Non-members could attend these meetings; they were not excluded. Saturday’s meeting is that kind of meeting. It is not a town hall. It was never advertised to be a town hall. (Not every appearance by a public official here in Florence needs to be a town hall!) It is to be a quick (one hour, probably) stop by Rep. McKeown to say hello, say a few things, and answer several questions on her way to an actual town hall in Yachats. Rep. McKeown holds town halls. She had one in Florence last April. Expect another here soon.
Printed January 11, 2014, in the Siuslaw News
***
Our new chair emailed club members an article about the Trans-Pacific Partnership bill that President Obama favored and that many Democrats did not. He received back a number of messages. I recorded those comments that addressed whether the FADC should become an issue focused advocacy pressure group. I have not included names in most instances because the emails were private messages, not intended for public perusal.
***
from the Wife of the Zealot Ex-Chair to Another Club Member February 2, 2014
The TPP is clearly a travesty. Time to pull our heads out of the sand.
How do we get back on track? Not by being submissive and crawling back into our 'boxes' thereby allowing elected leadership to dictate. We elect people to represent us, we pay their salaries ~ they need to work for us. Grassroots action comes from outrage ~ not 'political convenience' to elected officials.
From Arnie Roblan’s Head Staff Member to the Current Chair February 2, 2014
Thank you .... My hope is that folks will not use the email forum to send their unnecessary spew in the hope of trying to convince us that Democrats need to have a monolithic voice. I certainly do not vote for an individual to represent all my views.
From Harold Titus to the Chair and Club Members February 2, 2014
The last thing I want our club to be is a pressure group. It has been primarily an organization created to support Democratic Party candidates for public office. It has been an organization that seeks to educate itself about issues – national, state, and local – that it deems important. It has done public service work. It has not been an organization that publicly states: ”The FADC supports ...” (this, that, etc.) Individual members have acted publicly in defense of or in opposition to various political actions and viewpoints. It is not that we members have been timid, quiescent. (I’ve had over 100 letters to the editor printed in Oregon newspapers)
The issue for me is not whether I am for or against a particular issue (I am definitely against the TPP agreement. I would be happy to send Senator Wyden a letter to that effect, or authorize my name to such a letter written by somebody else who bundles names of individuals also in support, providing I approve of the tone and content of the message) Using our club name to represent all of its members in any such public announcement or correspondence implies that everybody in our club agrees with whatever has been written. I believe that disagreement within our club should be respected, not ignored, not demeaned.
If we go the pressure group route, we will lose membership. The makeup of the club would likely become more monolithic, less objective, more zealous. We could become a stove-pipe organization like Citizens Democracy Watch, whose members, in my judgment, reinforce each others’ viewpoints, frustrations, and need to communicate anger. I certainly witnessed that at Arnie Roblan’s town hall last May.
Grass-roots activism can be a lot of things. Indeed, our public officials need to know what each of us wants. Beating Democratic Party office holders over their heads with angry assertions and self-righteous declarations demonstrates, in my opinion, an intolerance toward any viewpoint different from one’s own, an arrogance that presumes that one is best qualified to determine the legislative decisions that one questions, and a nastiness akin to what we have witnessed of the Tea Party Right. Being courteous and respectful in our expressions of concern and opposition is vital. It is not a weakness. It is not submissiveness. Zealotry and rage are counter-productive.
Responses to My E-Mail
Wow. Harold. Thoroughly well said. This why you are a bonafide author. Maybe we need a purpose. Statement. One that is inclusive along the line stated below.
Arnie Roblan’s head staff member (2-2-2014)
Harold,
So far I have responded to two people who asked what was the purpose of our group, supporting like minded Democrats or a discussion group. I responded that the club was founded on the principle of electing democratic representation.
While I agree with you that we should sign as individuals to causes we feel strongly about, I would like to drop the issue now. I will not sign as chair of FADC on any letter to our representatives, I will sign and write letters that I am in agreement with as an individual. We are fast approaching the first primaries and need to focus our energies on the best approach to work with Dawn & Brad. I also was in communication with … [Roblan’s lead staff member] and thanked her for her contribution of a different perspective and the time she spent with us. Frankly I enjoyed the exchange .…
The current Chair (2-2-2014)
Well said Harold!
You
are responding to something for which I am not in the loop.
Sometimes
I wish I were an active dedicated FDC member, but
something about it just
does not compel me enough. Sometimes I
am frustrated that I don't know
what others are supporting, or
whether they are aware of issues that might
benefit from their
support.
But
I sit here at my computer and do my best, and like, you, if
the
groups that provide a format for me to sign, and I am on
board with the
issue, how it is presented, etc. I will sign on.
Thank you for bringing this information.
A Member Who Would Be Very Critical of Me in 2016 (2-3-2014)
Harold, First, I want to thank you for your heart felt statements. Having said that I want to respectfully disagree with the premise of your communication. I believe it is our obligation to hold elected officials accountable for their actions or in actions, as the case may be. When I belong to an organization one of my obligations is to observe the rule that majority rule is the order. I don't believe you disagree. I agree with your comments about what we should not do to our Democratic office holders. I however would observe that if a majority of our members would agree on a subject that should be of interest to an elected official, we not only have the right but the obligation to communicate our positions. I really believe Harold that if you take away our ability to take positions on issues, we weaken our Club's usefulness. Harold, you are probably the best qualified to write letters to the editor but not all of our members have the same capability. Harold, on a personal note I want you to know that I respect your opinion very much, I just disagree with you on this subject.
A Member with Whom in Late 2012 I exchanged F-you’s because He Challenged How I Had Chosen to Conduct a Discussion and Resented My Curt Response (2-3-2014)
My Response to This Individual
Thank you, ..., for your response. I do believe there is very little (if anything) we disagree about. We should hold public officials accountable for the actions they take. If the majority of our members wish to do something, they should do it. Public officials should be informed of what their constituents believe and think. (You and I and … [another person] did that nearly 6 years ago) My concern is the manner in which Democratic Party officials are informed. With certain exceptions, most of them deserve, in my opinion, courtesy. And we should be open to hearing their points of view. I don’t want to see our organization become an “If you don’t agree with us, you’re the frickin’ enemy” type group. It’s that mind-set that bothers me. Least there by any misunderstanding, ,,, I want you to know that I respect your opinions just as much and if we have any disagreements (I’m not certain we do) I’m fine with that. (Why should I or any one individual get to determine who is wrong or right?)
Harold (2-3-2014)
From an Independent-Minded Member to the Chair Feb. 3, 2014
I agree with Harold's opinion on this topic:
1. 'Stove-pipe' style organizations have no credibility. Their correspondence rarely makes it to the desks of the real power brokers. Staff tosses it into the circular file first.
2. Real letters written by individuals carry (huge) actual weight: Conventional political wisdom has determined that one actual (properly written) business letter sent via U.S. Mail "speaks for" up to several thousand voters (depending on the density of the district).
The technique of getting that letter published in a newspaper, while simultaneously sending it under separate cover to the elected officials is the most effective means.…
A second, but still effective technique, is the writing of an actual personalized e-mail letter to the elected officials.
A distant third approach is the "signing on" of chain/organizational e-mails.
The absolute dead "loser" is anything resembling 'hate mail' from organizations tagged as stove-pipers.…
3. Civility is key. Any and all communication to elected officials has to adhere to conventional business protocols - or the message will be lost.
4.
I also agree that the Democratic Club is, in fact, a club that honors
diverse opinions, encourages education, and exists primarily for the
purpose of electing Democrats to public office. In facilitation of
this perspective, I read the club By-Laws - and I encourage all of us
to do that before the next meeting. …
Let's
brainstorm some broad policy commitments that can appeal to new
voters and help build our Party.
From a Leading Club Member to the Chair February 3, 2014
I apologize for doing this over the internet, but I wanted to let all of you know at the same time that I am resigning from the FADC, both as an officer and as a member, for health reasons effective immediately.
The hate, anger and negativity that is being generated by … [the ex-chair and his wife and another member] is not something I want to be around. After Saturday, I could not stop thinking of what happened in January with the three of them and that fact that it is continuing and will continue as long as they are members. I did not sleep well Saturday night, waking up and thinking about what needed to be done and how we might change the tenor of the meetings. Sunday, I started getting another angina attack, and decided it was not worth it to me.
I am taking this year off from every stress I can possibly manage, and the FADC is one I don't need right now. I am sorry to leave you in a bind, but I will not put my health at risk. ...
… [The three members mentioned above] are poison to the club.
From the Ex-Chair to the New Chair February 3, 2014
I respectfully disagree with Harold's message to you regarding "What do we want the Club to be?" I think we should express our position on an issue to our legislators if there is membership consensus. We did so last year. If you remember, we sent a letter to Senator Merkley praising his support for and effort on filibuster reform.
The New Chair’s Response
That was a letter of praise and support. In my mind different in the tone and substance of HT message. I prefer the letters with as many signatures as possible rather than from the Chair or FADC. Also more in the tradition of our club.
(2-3-2014)
From a Member Friend to Harold Titus February 3, 2014
No, Harold, we want you just to be there,...and once in awhile on the sidelines, maybe to let us know when we break from our foundation. But,we want you there. I'm willing to ride this attempted "cout de tat'"? out, and we'll be a better club,when we're through it. I think when … [the zealot and his wife] can't take over the club, they'll find a place with the Citizen's Democracy Watch, where they belong. It's good for any project to take a good hard look at itself, and make sure it's on track, eh?
From a Good Friend and Former Chair to Harold Titus February 4, 2014
RE the club meeting;
… [The new chair] is learning ‘’The Impossible to Herd Cats, both genders, Syndrome’’ that was in strong evidence with … [the guy I had exchanged f-you’s with in 2012] starting off in full volume. …
...
Thirty members and some new younger blood is what we wanted for FADC, and our hope is to guide them when they appear to us to be too zealous.
That’s our job and you expressed it well.
From the Independent-Minded Member to the New Chair February 12, 2014
After a recent coffee, some of us came up with a thought that can help cut through the slow-downs at FADC:
Have people with their
"important issues" come thirty minutes early before each
meeting. They can congregate into their "mini-groups" (aka
"committees" if necessary). They can have one person
summarize their consensus on that issue and report to the whole FADC
in a one minute presentation. Rather than "open up" the
floor for time consuming commentary, the Chair can instruct members
that they are free to contact each "summarizer" AFTER the
meeting.
It will also have the net effect of removing the "obstructionist capacity" that has run rampant and allowed various individuals to try and turn the Club into a stove-pipe lobby group.
Frankly,
to quote one of the coffee drinkers: "I am so sick of water
district stuff and the GMO stuff....We need to help those folks help
themselves in a venue that is appropriate to their personal
cause(s)."
… I have heard this complaint from
several of the Club's key members. It's time to clarify that we are
NOT a lobby/stovepipe organization.
...
The
coffee drinkers had a procedural thought on this topic: When people
contact you basically demanding that you push their agendas onto the
Club: Pause and simply suggest that they contact the members
directly. That will give the rest of us the opportunity to decide
whether or not we want to receive further communication from them.
***
I wrote a long, boring letter in April that supported a liberal candidate to replace our district’s libertarian, incumbent county commissioner, Jay Bozievich. In September I wrote this letter in support of our replacement FADC chair, who was running for a position on the Florence city council.
***
I am particular about whom in public office I want to represent me. I abhor discrimination. I detest exploitation. I want an honest, informed, strong-minded, empathetic person who values “the level playing field,” who sees injustices and works to eliminate them. I want to witness fairness. I want my public official to say by his actions: “This is who I am. This is what I believe. I will look for merit in opposing viewpoints. But I will not sacrifice my principles. Public service is my sole objective. If you agree with what I stand for, elect me. If not, don’t.”
Peter DeFazio and Jeff Merkley are such public officials. So also would be [the name of the person], running for Florence City Council.
... is a friend of mine. I met ... maybe six years ago when he and his wife moved to Florence. He lives down the street from me. He joined the Florence Area Democratic Club when I was its president [chair]. He immediately volunteered to become a Lane County Democratic Party precinct person. He served three years as our club treasurer. He is currently our president. I know well his political and societal values.
I also know how well he works with people. I have witnessed this during his tenure as president of our neighborhood homeowners association. He led us through two contentious years. He is soft-spoken, polite, well informed, open to others’ viewpoints, diligent, and forthright.
He rolled my garbage barrel up my driveway to its pick-up place in the street when my back went out.
I champion {his name] in his quest to serve on the City Council. I have no doubt that he would prove to be an excellent councilman.
Printed September 24, 2014, in the Siuslaw News
No comments:
Post a Comment