There are very few jobs in a party that take more punches to the gut with less reward than the position of Kansas State Democratic Party Chair. It's an unpaid position that requires the person that holds the job to fulfill duties that has real world cost in travel, time and headaches.
Because of these factors a large number of candidates are instantly disinterested, and the role of Party Chair is often seen as attainable only by those who have time and resources to take on the job.
Kansas this year has a greater complication: after three cycles of continuous losses, Democrats in many areas of the state wonder if there is a road back to victory.
As Democrats in Kansas move toward Washington Days, the yearly gathering of Democratic delegates, we have a candidate who has decided to take on the difficult task ahead.
Larry Meeker is the former mayor of Lake Quivira, a pocket community in the Kansas City metro area, and a well respected community leader. In speaking with Mr. Meeker this week, he told me that entertaining the idea of running for party chair "wasn't even on my radar" until Paul Davis and Joan Wagnon, amongst others asked him to consider the job.
In a free wheeling series of conversations Meeker discussed the issues that faced Kansas, and his willingness to work to change the perception problem that the state party has built up, especially in rural areas.
As of today, Larry Meeker stands alone as candidate for state party chair - but it wasn't always that way. In the opening challenges to become state party chair, Theresa Krusor. Theresa Krusor, the State Democratic Committee Person to the National Organization was also recently elected midwest chair of the Hispanic caucus.
Speaking before the first and second district meetings, Krusor offered a program of outreach to the rural and western areas of Kansas, especially the Latin American vote, something which I have advocated repeatedly.
I have not spoken to, nor would I be willing to endorse Theresa Krusor for the job, especially considering that her stay in the state chair race was cut short, as she removed herself from contention in a week. In a message relayed to Facebook by two county chairs and three delegates, Theresa Krusor informed potential voters that she was asked to remove herself from the race by Paul Davis for the good of the party, and she believed this was the proper course of action.
Update: While I have no doubt of the veracity of those who forwarded and posted elsewhere, this weekend we were informed that this may have went differently and that Theresa either mis-spoke or that others were confused as to what she had said. It is difficult to retain that outside of the posts that have been delivered and archived elsewhere. While numerous delegates have confirmed this direct interaction, as there is an ask that we say this is only their comment on it, I'm adding a section to note the dispute over the way this was handled.
If there was ever a move that was more politically tone def to the anger in the room since the race began, I'm unsure of what it would be. The exit of Theresa Krusor, and her revelation that Paul Davis had asked her to leave created instant turmoil amongst many small groups, many of whom pointed at this as further proof that 'party insiders' had decided an election before there was an opportunity to voice an opinion.
While Theresa Krusor had appeared at the District 1 and 2 meetings, District 4's meeting - which occurred after her withdraw, included neither candidate, only a spokesman - lending to the idea that the race was 'over' and that the discussion was closed.
I've spoken with Larry Meeker a few times over the last week, and I have found him to be an honorable and trustworthy man. I believe if he says he'll do something he will. And, as a progressive, Larry Meeker is one of us - he is someone who I believe would have been well served to compete for the state chair and win it of his own accord, in a contest between two people running for office, because his grasp of ideas I think would appeal to many within the party.
The decision to remove Theresa from the race, though, immediately re-ignited those who felt as though they were being locked out of the process and I believe started an unplanned debate.
The Draft Dennis McKinney movement, which consists of a small group of people, though at this point I am unsure of how small, grew out of comments made in meetings in the west as well as diaries I have written here. Most of them focused over the direction of the party. Most importantly, they began on the concept that Dennis McKinney would be interested in the job. While Dennis McKinney is a moderate Democrat - one who voted for anti-choice restrictions, he also recruited many of the pro-choice candidates who became the legislators that built the party.
Throughout the year, I've taken time to speak with most of the delegates and state committee people. I've openly encouraged them to treat a single man race as though it was a real race - to demand answers to the questions they have, to hold the party accountable, and if they are unhappy with the effort, they should voice their concerns.
That is not a knock on Larry Meeker - that is what the process is for, that people need to view these internal elections as a chance to have a real discussion over their concerns and get answers.
This led to an ongoing debate about the Draft movement; specifically whether or not I was bankrolling it (I'm not), or whether I agreed with them. The answer is simple: I don't agree with the tactics necessarily, but I believe they have a right to be angry. More importantly, I openly advocated early and often that should the party decide to continue along the same pattern, the results would not be kind.
On the other hand, I have individuals who are upset I am not more active in campaigning against Larry Meeker, in light of my comments about control of the party being stationed within the northeast. I have no interest in campaigning against someone for a job I'm not sure if anyone else wants.
My personal opinion is that Larry Meeker is a good man who understands he faces an uphill battle in changing the makeup of the Democratic Party in Kansas. I don't in any way envy him that task. I think he was done a great disservice when Paul Davis pushed Theresa Krusor out of the race, and that political move to stop a contest - and little else - is what fueled turmoil that could have been completely avoided. It has nothing to do with whether or not Krusor would have been great at it. I think that an open debate between two candidates was something that a lot of people deeply, strongly desired and would have been very positive for all involved.
Democrats nationwide are running into this problem - something I've heard from friends around the country. What defines a Democrat? What defines a progressive? What is progress?
These will be difficult tasks. In speaking with Larry Meeker, I believe he will endeavor to address all of these issues in a thoughtful, direct way. I understand how frustrated party insiders are at a campaign seemingly run by neophytes for a stalking horse candidate who is unlikely to even be interested in the job.
This is the dirty nature of politics. I remember the bitter back and forth on DailyKos when infighting between those who backed Hillary Vs those who backed Obama was real. And today we still have some infighting between a group that wants Warren - despite her repeated, public statements that she will not consider running - over Clinton this time around.