I was there the night of the Democratic National Convention in the midst of history, when Hillary rallied Bernie, “Your cause is our cause,” and “Our country needs your ideas, energy, and passion.” I was asked by some party members to volunteer to help with the Convention; the election was too monumental, simply too important, to stand aside. I was with her, even after the loss. But that has changed following revelations of her campaign’s misconduct during the election.
Once my credentials were confirmed, I immediately left Columbus, Ohio where I spent my 1L summer. I spent my birthday on the road to Philadelphia. After Hillary’s speech, and a brief conversation with Tim Kaine, I was again on the road back to Berkeley Law. In just about three days, I drove the 2,865 miles. I had only two complaints: that Ohio Senator, Sherrod Brown, was not featured more prominently on the ticket and what I will describe below.
I remember thinking of how Hillary’s open conversation with Bernie during her speech was only possible in the United States. I have spent a lot of time studying failed democracies. Often, democracies fall apart because, as Ziblatt writes, progress takes a backseat to corruption, electoral manipulation, and institutions designed to benefit a few. That night, the United States, looked like anything but a failing democracy, although, as I will describe below, there were traces of these failings. So, I have been shocked, but not surprised, with the recent accusations of Hillary’s “Secret Takeover of the DNC.”
The challenge is twofold. On one level, the nation must have a dialogue about the two-party duopoly that the Democratic Party and the Republican Party reigns over our elections. Similarly, the Democratic Party must have a conversation within itself.
First, the New York Times ran an editorial a couple of years ago by, Micah Sifry. Essentially Sifry’s argument can be boiled down to the following: the two-party system inhibits “political competition” from those who would otherwise hope to challenge candidates of the Democratic or Republican Party, but are limited in their ability to do so. In turn, inspirational candidates and good ideas, are left outside of the debate – as seen in 2000 and 2016. Time and again, Americans are left with an incomplete debate and those who would, otherwise, be successful at mobilizing concrete change in our country are stifled. As a result, our democracy remains politically stagnant.
Second, the Democratic Party must consider the best way to move forward. If all Progressive candidates must work through the Democratic Party, then it should facilitate equitable opportunities. But what does this look like in practice? Allow me to relay a personal experience to demonstrate. I grew up in abject poverty on the West Side of Columbus in a Section 8 apartment complex called, South Park. This complex is situated between two cemeteries, an industrial byway, and a parking lot for what used to be the Clipper’s Stadium. An environmental justice community, like so many others in the nation, with no voice in the current system. I have found opportunities through education, mentors and I worked my way to Berkeley Law and now the London School of Economics.
While working in Columbus during my 1L summer and seeing the same projects I grew up in, I gained interest in learning more about running for office. When I met with an influential member of the Columbus Democratic Party, I was merely told that, “You’re nothing more than a white guy.” The irony is acute considering that this particular individual was himself white and grew up on the outer parts of Columbus, near the suburbs. More importantly, his agenda was unconcerned with disadvantaged communities. It seems that those who live in a glass house, should not throw stones.
My story is not unlike the experiences of other young progressive leaders. While working the DNC, for example, a California contingency, who avidly supported Sanders during the primaries was literally silenced – the cameras in the arena would avoid including these supporters in their shots. Additionally, I was instructed by a fellow DNC worker, not to hand this contingency the American flags we were distributing. I distributed them regardless. In fact, many of them were my friends. They told me that they felt isolated during the Convention – the antithetical reality of Hillary’s togetherness ethos. To think that fellow progressives who had traveled so far, would be excluded.
While these actions do not necessarily reflect Hillary’s values, it does demonstrate a larger problem: that the exclusivity of the Democratic Party is top-down, even on our night of unity. At this moment, we require serious reevaluation. We must consider who we are and who we are to become. I joined the Democratic Party from the moment I could vote and had long been a supporter even before then. Now, I am not too sure. As I’ve said, I was with her.
For me to stay in the Party, along with the other millions of young people who are also questioning whether to stay, I propose the following. First, the Democratic Party must establish a sort of leadership pipeline that helps to cultivate young people’s leadership from a variety of backgrounds – racially and socio-economically. Second, Hillary, and especially the Party, should issue an apology. After all, if we do not admit the problem, and recognize the role the Party played in perpetuating it, such problems will continue to persist. Finally, Democratic members of Congress need to establish funding opportunities for those from underrepresented communities to intern in Washington, D.C. internships in Washington are some of the most stratified opportunities in the Country. I’ve seen this myself as an intern in Senator Sherrod Brown’s Office, a fellow with the Committee on Education and the Workforce, and as a law clerk with the Department of Justice. We must do better.