Several sources have emailed me the proposed changes to the TNDP Executive Committee…and by now Knoxviews and LeftWingCracker has published it as well…so I don’t feel all that bad sharing it with you.
The proposed changes would actually increase the current membership from 72 to a current total of 86ish:
• No changes are being made to the 66 members of the Executive Committee that are elected as one man and one woman from each state senate district;
• The amendment states that the House Democratic Leader shall appoint six members to the Executive Committee, two from each of Tennessee’s grand divisions, for a term of two years;
• The amendment states that the Senate Democratic Leader shall appoint six members to the Executive Committee, two from each of Tennessee’s grand divisions, for a term of two years;
• The amendment says each U.S. Congressman, if a Democrat, shall serve on the Executive Committee or appoint a member to the Executive Committee;
• The amendment says each U.S. Senator, if a Democrat, shall serve on the Executive Committee or appoint a member to the Executive Committee;
• The amendment says Tennessee’s governor, if a Democrat, shall serve on the Executive Committee or appoint a member to the Executive Committee;
• The amendment states that the Executive Committee may create ex-officio voting positions, provided that the number of such positions shall not exceed nine members.
These changes would see the Committee balloon to as many as 99 members…assuming all the slots were filled.
Wondering what this accomplishes
Now a bunch of hysteria has been stirred up over the “dismantling of the Executive Committee” over the weekend. I don’t know who’s responsible, but I do know one thing: If electeds were talking to their Executive Committee, none of this would have happened.
Apparently they not only aren’t talking, they’re not communicating.
Communication has been a consistent problem surrounding the party since before we lost the Senate leadership in 2006.
What I want to know is how anyone in their right mind thinks making the body bigger will somehow make it more effective? This just makes the cat herding even more difficult.
The most interesting part of this is…aside from creating 14 (for now) new Executive Committee members, I’m not sure what this does in practical terms to further the interests of the remaining Democratic legislators in Nashville.
This would actually increase urban leadership…though maybe not the percentage…which is not where we’re getting creamed. Its rural areas that we’ve been losing ground.
So I’m confused. Aside from getting to appoint their 12 closest friends, and pissing off the current Executive Committee, what exactly does this accomplish?
Another thing: Taking into account the level of hysteria that’s been stirred up over this whole affair, I can’t help but wonder if there isn’t a bit of dog wagging going on here from the party.
Considering the multiple sources that I got this from, and their commentary, it seems pretty clear that the proposal, as it stands now, represents a compromise.
Who knows what the original amendment looked like.
But was the hysteria necessary, was it ginned up to be Machiavellian, or was it borne out of a lack of disclosure? Probably the latter. I doubt many in the party, or elected officials even know who Machiavelli is [/sarcasm]. Either way, it doesn’t bode well for the sponsors case.
Anyone who’s been paying attention since before 2009 knows there’s been some serious fractures between the elected officials and the party. There’s been frustration and anger, finger pointing and more.
What there hasn’t been is solutions or compromise. Remember, that’s the foundation of Democracy.
By trying to force feed this change, rather than use the party bylaws structure to change the way the party does business (like by establishing a steering committee that gives the electeds more power in decisions, which is something I would be open to BTW) legislators are trying to bully their way into getting their way.
One commenter at opines that this is about their guy not winning the Chair.
Kinda hard to argue with that.
Fighting each other instead of fighting for the party
So we’re left with a fight between two groups of Democrats, both elected, both deserving large shares of the blame (IMHO) for the losses over the past 3+ cycles, and neither doing anything that I can see that would prevent the Titanic from hitting the iceberg.
In fact, they both seem hell bent on playing chicken with it.
Its dumb. Its short sighted. Its not productive.
In the end, the sponsors of this bill end up looking like either bullies or whiners…neither of which are flattering. The State Executive Committee, as a whole looks self-interested and still aloof.
Nobody wins…unless the target I just put on my back somehow unites the under a common cause.
I should be so lucky.
Here’s a idea. Be adults. Work together. Stop being petty. Start talking about the fundamentals I mentioned in my last post.
Most of all, stop being distracted by what you can’t do together and start doing the things you CAN do together.
You just might find some of the challenging areas open up and become easier with a little cooperation.