Wow, what a terrific post.

I will tell you what- from May 4th, when my finals end, through May 16th, I am going to be an Anne Dicker super volunteer.

Again, this is a really terrific post. Anne is a wonderful candidate. If you have any time, or money, I strongly encourage to you get involved here.

Hannah Miller expressed her disappointment yesterday in NN's failure to endorse Anne Dicker. Then she noted, philosophically:

"But people my age have spent our entire lives watching Boomers sell out and sell out and sell out again. Why should this year be any different?"

I know and respect Hannah. But that kind of talk is what helps keep the left fractured. NN no more "sold out" by failing to endorse Dicker, than Philly for Change sold out by failing to endorse Chuck Pennacchio (which NN did).

NN has a democratic decision making process which will sometimes bring about results that many of us may not like. Personally, I wanted to endorse Anne. But our neighborhood organizations didn't vote that way. It basically takes an 80% vote of NN's Steering Committee to endorse a candidate not endorsed by our neighborhood groups. Anne didn't get 80%. Period. No one sold anything. And btw, NN didn't endorse any of Anne's opponents either. It will be neutral in that race. NN members, of course, will be able to endorse whoever they want as individuals. Many of us have been, and will be, with Anne.

NN did endorse Pennacchio who received overwhelming approval from our neighborhood groups. Apparently he was better at persuading those groups than Anne was. NN certainly gets no bennies from that endorsement; Pennacchio has nothing to give us. If we had endorsed Alan Sandals, or Casey, things might have been different. But we went with the candidate who best expresses our ideals, and who is most connected to the grass roots.

Finally, I want to note that NN is not populated only by baby-boomers, but that even if it were, that particular generation left quite a progressive mark on this country. In truth NN is cross generational, though tilted toward the post 40 set, and has quite a few members who are also members of Philly for Change.

So let's work hard for our candidates. But let's not burn bridges with our friends as we do.

When we were designing the Neighborhood Network bylaws we spent a lot of time trying to balance central vs. local control, especially with regard to elections in races for state representative, state senate and district city council seats.

There is a case to be made that local activists are most likely to know whether candidates running in races whose districts are a part of the city have done or are likely to do a good job serving that district. And, after all, one of the most important tasks of these elected officials is to address local issues. When I ran for state representative two years ago, I talked about state wide issues a great deal. But I talked even more about how I would help improve the quality of life in the 198th district. One of my best received campaign lines was that I had “Dwight Evans envy for the 198th district.” In Northwest Philadelphia everyone knows what that means. For all that he has done, mostly for good, in making state-wide public policy, Dwight Evans’ most impressive achievement is the transformation he has helped to bring about in West Oak Lane.

There is also a case to be made for making decisions in these races by the central organization, in this case the Neighborhood Networks Steering Committee. For the central organization is most likely to be the place where people know more about the broader consequences of our endorsements for public policy and the future of progressive politics.

So we decided to try for some balance between local and central control. We gave our local groups the authority to act first in district races. But we gave the steering committee the authority to overturn their decisions by a 2/3rds vote. As our bylaws were interpreted at the last meeting, we did not give the steering committee the right to endorse a candidate where there was no local endorsement and that was the case in the 175th. So we had to use another procedure and ask for an 80% vote to suspend the bylaw to endorse Anne. We fell short by a little bit.

In retrospect, I think we tilted the balance too much in favor of the local groups. We should have allowed the Steering Committee to make an endorsement even against the decision of the local groups if 2/3rds of our members agreed. I will propose such an amendment to our bylaws. But I still think that it is important to maintain some balance between local and central control

So the issue in our decision in the 175th was not really democracy vs. progressive ideals but local vs. central democracy. I think all of us want Neighborhood Networks to be a little d democratic group.

There is something to be said for top-down political groups, like MoveOn, that don’t really answer to anyone but their leaders. Groups of that kind can certainly move more quickly than a group like NN. They can speak with one voice. And if the founders stay true to their ideals, those ideals are not likely to change.

But while I think it would be useful to have a variety of approaches on the left, I also think that the NN approach is really valuable. One reason to be democratic is the phenomena Hannah pointed to—political officials and organizations sometimes sell out. Over the long term, the best way to avoid selling out is to conduct ourselves democratically.

I know that, as one of the leaders of NN, it is a tremendous relief that none of us can make deals for the support of NN. And believe me there have been offers. Over the last nine months, more than a few folks who want to run for judge next year have hinted that they would put me on their payroll if I could deliver the NN endorsement. But, as I said at our founding conference, NN is not for sale. And it can’t be for sale because it is not controlled by a few people.

Another advantage of a democratic organization is that it is encourage more people to get deeply involved in politics. Many of our members really have a sense of ownership over NN. That motivates them to work hard. Of course, some of our members also are willing to spend an enormous amount of time debating matters that, in my view, are of little relevance to our larger concerns. And there is no question taht we sometimes get procedure bound as well.

But, one reason things like this happen is that in our depoliticized society, very few people know much about acting politically. And that is true even for--maybe I should say especially for--the mostly white, mostly middle class folks who started NN, who tend to overestimate the importance of passing resolutions for passing legislation. (I should add, though, that our membership is much more diverse than it was at our founding.)

Over the long term, involvement in a group like NN is likely to give people the kind of political training that is so hard to get nowadays. That training will be more effective if lots of people can get involved in decisionmaking and that is only possible if we have strong local organizations.

As our members learn more about how to organize effectively, our decision-making process will improve and our ability to recruit more people and be a real lever for change will dramatically increase. And maybe we will even begin to recruit from our members some candidates who can make a difference first locally and then beyond.

Given the current political climate, any kind of left political organizing is a bit of a gamble. Those of us who started NN are gambling that our political ideals of social justice and political reform are best served by reviving democratic participation in the political process and that, over the long term, we can best do this by starting with our own political processes.

I was disappointed at the NN decison in teh 175th. But lots of NN members are working hard for Anne. And as readers of this blog probably know, I am one of them. If you want to know why, go to my blog, at www.stier.net/blog

...as I think it is critical for NN members to hear what other activists in Philadelphia think of our decisions. Stan and I both disagreed with the decision of NN in the 175th and to hear others express similar views is an important part of the political learning experience for NN members that, I pointed out, is part of why I think the NN model is going to be so valuable. Not to sound too Maoist about this, I think that criticism and self-criticism is an important part of the experience.

One of the arguments Stan and I both made at the NN Steering Committee meeting is that we believe that NN is committed to grassroots politicking and that this in itself is a good reason to support Anne over Terry. But as DE II points out, one of the arguments against our view was that deferring to the local NN group is part of our commitment to grassroots politics. A number of NN steering committee members abstained even though they favored Anne precisely because they didn't want to override the South Philly NN group. While I disagreed with this view, and am disappointed by our decision, I wouldn't say that those on the other side were unreasonable.

Stan's reply was not meant to stifle criticism of NN, but to point out that it had nothing to do with selling out. With one possible exception, those in NN who supported Terry, or who did not want to override the South Philly endorsement of NN, had nothing to gain by taking that position. On the other hand, some of us who supported Anne might have something to lose by breaking with our friends and allies in the labor community who are supporting Terry.

I know that, in the heat of a campaign, talking about the long term and the learning experience for NN members doesn't bring much comfort, especially to those who are working their hearts out. I wish I had something to say that helps but I am not sure that I do. They way I deal with these kinds of frustrations is to try to understand them and then get on with the business at hand. All of us writing here are pretty much in agreement, so I think we might best start focusing on what more we can do to help Anne Dicker in the short run, and in building up a progressive movement in the long run.

In the very short term, I hope to see you all at Anne’s fundraiser on Monday.

And, in the slightly longer term, I hope you all will do some volunteering for Anne and, also, take part in the NN primary campaign about which I will post something tomorrow. NN is going to be working to support the following candidates in competitive primaries: Chuck Pennacchio, Valerie McDonald Roberts, Babette Josephs, and James Roebuck.

As for Tony Payton, Jr., frankly we decided not to make an endorsement because there is nothing we can do to help him as an organization in this uncontested primary. We just don’t have any members in his district, although I know some folks there who I have been trying to recruit. Tony is a friend of mine, and a wonderful candidate, and I will be blogging on his behalf soon. I hope that in the course of the next few weeks and months we can all work together to build a progressive organization that will support Tony and other progressive candidates in the future. If we can actually create a local organization that can give him some help, NN could endorse him in the general election.

I beat Larry to 50 by seven months.

That is one of the main reasons I didn't run for the State House again this year...although I must say I had second thoughts when I saw all the retirements. But the more I learn about how Harrisburg worked, the more I couldn't see waiting until I was 60 to have some real influence. I seem to be getting more energy the older I get, but I don't know what is going to happen in ten more years.

There is some opening for new folks of any age this year. But we are certainly better off with people the age of Anne Dicker and Tony Payton (and Cherelle Parker, to remind you of one of our other great young progressive leaders).

The failure on the part of the South Philly Neighborhood Networks and Americans for Democratic Action not to endorse Anne Dicker for Representative is disappointing.

Philly for Change made a mistake by choosing to endorse Sandals rather than Chuck Pennacchio.

The failure on the part of the Neighborhood Networks Steering Committee not endorse Tony Payton Jr. is also disappointing.

Hannah Miller "Miseducated"? Not in the least bit. Hannah's post and this dialogue is interesting and critical. One of the dynamics which have not read is about the gap between the Baby Boomer liberals and young progressives. Does it exist strategic or ideological reasons?

None of these organizations "sold out" but, I do think that when it comes to a younger candidate some people unconsciously restrain their political fortitude.

Lastly, I agree with larryceisler, "Chakka Fattah would better serve Philadelphia in Congress."

First I want to wish Larry a happy birthday. Neighborhood Networks is a vital part to growth in the city and needed. They are doing positive things in the city and need to continue. While I have not seen much of what Philly for Change has actually done besides meet at a bar, I figure it can not be that bad and organization is key to success.

I am confused you want people to Support Anne Dicker because she is the founder of your group. But don't want people to support incumbents practically for the same reason. Anne Dicker is basically your incumbent.

It just sounds to me like you want to be the incumbents but have not gotten there. It sounds much more like you want Philly to Change the people instead of Philly to Changing the practices.

While there will be many young interesting young legislators coming to Harrisburg like Tony Payton Jr., John Sabatina Jr, etc. Youth is not deserving to become a legislator, you actually have to field work and build relationships with the neighborhoods and eventually campaign and possibly win an election.

I wish every candidate good luck in a campaign because 9 out of 10 people do not want to be in their shoes anyway. The voters decided who represents them if they want your "progressive" or not a NN, or Philly for Change, or any other endorsement does not mean much

Well -- I'm just about to leave for today's canvassing, meeting neighbors, etc...but I can't help talk about what Philly for Change has done since its inception.

1. In March 2003, without any previous policial experience, Philly for Dean spontaneously formed and helped an unknown anti-war candidate and former Vermont governor became the front-runner of a Presidential campaign. We raised over $100,000 in PA alone through house parties. We organized a 4,000 person rally on the foot steps of the Constitution Center when that candidate came into town briefly...And we blogged our way to internet stardom :-)

2. In 2004, when the Dean candidacy crashed and burned, we changed our name to Philly for Change and we set up training sessions to Get Out the Vote -- training hundreds of new people how to go door to door and registered thousands of new voters. We did this on a shoe-string -- without billionaire donors.

3. In 2005, when everyone else was moping around -- we organized a statewide Coalition to Defend Social Security. We travelled throughout the state educating citizens, we brought in economic experts, we lobbied representatives, wrote letters to the editor, and we rallied across the state, most noteably we rallied on the front steps of Drexel -- making CNN's political play of the week as well as getting prominent coverage in Newsweek.

After "the big boys" came in on Social Security -- months after we knew we were going to win -- we switched our focus to Raising the Minimum Wage and Repealing the Pay Raise. We formed a state wide coalition called Pennsylvania for Democracy - which now boasts 20,000 members. We took over committeeperson slots all over the state -- from Gettysburg to Meadville to Carlisle to Allentown.

In August 2005, we realized we needed to take back the US House -- so we organized a candidate forum -- with 5 US Congressional Candidates. We encouraged members to join their campaigns - EARLY- so they would be strong by the time November 2006 rolled around.

We continued our own Democracy for America trainings, and encouraged our members to attend candidate training through organizations like CPL and Wellstone Action.

4 In 2006, we decided to run people for committeeperson -- the lowest level possible in the PA Democratic party. We continue to support US Congressional candidates but we are now seeking to support grassroots progressives that can help us take back the PA House and Senate.

We continue to train hundreds of newly involved citizens statewide, promote new people to run for office, and effectively lobby across the state and country -- all on less money than it costs you to take your family out to dinner once a month.

I know we meet in bars -- but with all the work we put in beyond our day jobs and the fact that our country is going to hell in a handbasket -- don't you think we've earned a night out at a bar?

Cheers,
Anne

As a younger person supporting Terry Graboyes, I am shocked that progressives like Ann feel the need to dump on her in such mean-spirited ways. What's that about? Unless the person is 30 years old and blogs, we can't support them? Think about it - Terry is a long-time Democratic committeeperson in one of the FEW liberal wards in the City; she is a card-carrying union member and, no - contrary to what Hannah implied - not a Dougherty union member; she is pro-choice and pro-gay rights; she has a record of supporting liberal causes both with her checkbook and with her company - she pays her employees full health benefits, which lots of employers don't. Isn't this the profile of they type of person we want in Harrisburg? And really, many people think that there is NO WAY Ann Dicker could get elected in this district in a one-on-one race, with her profile and lack of experience. Does that make her a spoiler? Maybe, but I believe that she has a right to run, but let's stop bashing, okay?

I agree that Rick Santorum is a raging chode. And how does one go about working for change? Let's see according to Hannah "revolutionary" Miller you decree the entire South especially Texas a bunch of 'conservative bastards" in the local media. So in other words, come across like the snarky spoiled brat that a lot of people peg the so-called 'progressive' movement. Oh and you also gain some real credibility by quoting Lenin on your website. Yeah that's progressive. Get a clue Hannah or be prepared to snip at the heels of those in power for the rest of your adult life, when you actually get there.

I brought along my +50 hammer of troll-bashing.
I win a chest of treasure and a political headache! yay!

:))
acm

"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."
— Margaret Mead

We have to understand that it might be a nice thought that Anne does not have the political strings that some other candidates do. But without those strings you will not getting anything done.

Wonder what happened to Ben Ramos Sr. without the political strings?
He lost a primary fight to current St Rep Angel Cruz

What happened to Angel Ortiz without the political strings?
He lost a primary fight to current Councilman Juan Ramos

What happened to Mike Horsey without the political strings?
He lost a primary fight to current St. Rep Tommy Blackwell

How many bills have St. Reps Rosita Youngblood or Babetter Josephs got passed? few if none why? because they don't have the political backing

The reason why Howard Dean was the favorite candidate? because they were mainly online polls and telephone polls. He raised alot of money online. But alas online does not equate to votes and during the elections Dean got throttled by Kerry, Edwards, etc because they focused on people.

While it may be fun to go to bars and do political trainings and organize people to be bloggers and run campaigns. To be successful you have to be involved in the communities at a basic level. Like helping people put food on the table working to prevent crime, teach kids etc. Then you have to have political backing (strings however you say it), because otherwise, you'll only end up looking like the crying kid in the corner when they lost fight.

While I do wish every candidate good luck, you have to be realistic about what is going on. Elected Office is not just a prize, it is not a title it is a profession a job that requires experience, compassion and ability to work with people.

From the Daily News yesterday - in an Cathy Lucey article titled 'New kids on the Dem block', mentioning Anne and all you folks:

"I feels to me that there's an attitude out there that 'Now it's our turn to take over.' Which I really don't remember since the '60s."
- Zack Stalberg, chief executive, Committee of 70

...And if that is not the Boomer Housekeeping Seal of Approval, I don't know what is!