Changes at the national party level were implemented last week to, as Chair Tom Perez put it, restore faith in many Democratic Party faithful who had concerns about the process. Diminishing the role of caucuses and creating paths to leadership were widely accepted as ways to help grow participation in our party, and to empower the young, persons of color, people with disabilities, and the working poor.
From a public perspective, changes in the path to leadership and the internal process don’t mean as much as changes in superdelegates. As an advocate of the change, I truly believe it helps bring in new members and expand our base. Even if I believe in the positives, that doesn't mean that I don't see pitfalls. The newly revised Democratic National Committee rules also make it more important that leadership within our state and national organizations do more to directly raise up voices of color and to promote diversity in our leadership.
For those who voted yes on the proposed rule changes, we do not have the ability to wash our hands and say: mission completed. In order to be good stewards of our party, we have to understand the criticism of solutions such as the one we passed, work in every way possible to understand that criticism and work cooperatively to improve our party together.
Diversity doesn’t always equal equity
In a party committed to diversity, to more voices with a diverse background of experience, we have to remember that diversity isn’t the same as equity. If you invite a lot of people to your party but only a smaller group makes it into the inner circle, then you have to question how much equity is available.
Changes to the DNC, especially those around superdelegates, present this challenge for party members: there is more opportunity for people of diverse backgrounds to have their perspectives heard. I do believe that, as do many others, which is why the proposal received a 75 percent approval vote. That said, I am always skeptical about anything where one says, “I’m absolutely certain.”
While diversity is something that can be mathematically calculated to show how any plan can increase overall diversity, equity is not so easy to calculate.
Leah Daughtry, a member of the rules committee, was one of the first members of the Rules & Bylaws committee to embrace the second round vote proposal, but reconsidered after much time and thought—and let’s be clear, the reconsideration was about the issue of equity, not math. Her concerns have validity and present both a challenge and an opportunity.
Over several decades, persons of color within the Democratic Party have not always been welcomed into the room. Federal elected superdelegates are still not diverse in a way that reflects our nation. The Congressional Black Caucus exists, but it is a small subset of the Democratic federal elected, who are overwhelmingly older, white, and male. There are no black women elected as governor, at least until Stacey Abrams wins in Georgia this fall.
How is it then, that Democratic voices are provided equity? Daughtry was concerned by early proposals that called for binding state delegates, a solution which we all recognized would disproportionately harm persons of color. In a statement made in a meeting in Washington, D.C., she argued that this solution — removing the first round vote — would “treat everyone equally.”
And that’s a reasonable thought. There is a catch, however, and that catch in the end drove the Rev. Daughtry to oppose the solution—that treating everyone equally could be disadvantageous to persons of color if—and this is not unreasonable—if the Democratic Party and DNC members were not prepared to work hard to make sure that the voices of persons of color were respected, heard, and brought into the room to build the party for the future.
It’s Up to Us
As a mentioned at the beginning, one of the things I like about the changes made within the DNC in the last week is that we provide new pathways to leadership, as well as more opportunities to participate and vote. Opening the door is certainly good—but if we want this to work, we have to work harder than ever to help leaders of color walk through the door and be heard.
When the Rev. Daughtry talks about Lucy and the football, this is the moment. Democratic leadership is telling large groups of people there are more opportunities than ever before, and that is absolutely true. We have a clear opportunity for a younger leadership of color than ever before.
That opportunity can only be realized if we as a party make a commitment to do so, at all levels. This includes inviting more perspectives of persons of color, LGBTQ+, persons with disabilities, and persons of all faiths, walks of life, and economic status.
For people who voted and advocated for a YES vote (including me), we have committed to a moral obligation to redouble our efforts to make sure that we realize potential to provide an opportunity to more marginalized voices. It means a commitment to more executive directors, campaign workers, campaign staff, and candidates that match the diversity of our party.
This is a golden opportunity for the Democratic Party to show that our commitment extends beyond documents and public statements and into direct action to build the kind of leadership we think matters within our party. If we do this right, then by walking the talk we answer the concerns of Rev. Daughtry and others. If we fail to recognize we have a moral obligation to do so, then those who voted “YES” are not, in my opinion, fulfilling our side of the bargain.
Building power in our state organizations
If the Democratic Party of 2018, 2019, and 2020 works to empower new and diverse voices by making sure that when they are in the room we are willing to listen to them, then the upside is huge. How do we judge this, how do we determine we are doing everything possible to elevate voices that need to be in the room? I often ask: do we do enough by donating, supporting, and promoting marginalized voices?
We have to do this by building up our state, county, and local organizations. We have to provide a path to leadership not just at the party level, but to elected office for people with diverse voices and provide an outward statement that reflects Dennis Green’s: “They are who we thought they were!”
Imagine that—if a Democratic Party is seen as actively working to show that the membership is committed to more than just diversity, but an equity position in the development of our party.
Great responsibilities come with great rewards. Changes in our party open up real, potential opportunities to bring in a new generation of young, diverse leadership. That promise, though, has one of two outcomes: either we work hard to make it happen, or we behave like Lucy and the football, and do nothing to enable those opportunities.
This week, our community team will be traveling to The Native American Power Summit, in New Mexico, where Native American candidates and support networks will be sharing what they know to build up election opportunities to build up their voice, in their own community, and in our party.
For those of us who voted yes, it’s on us. And the work to build the party we desire? We can do it, we can build that party of the future. There is no time to wait, no justification for putting the work on hold for another day, or letting someone else do the work for us. The work to become the party we believe we can be starts now.