A Not So Brilliant Disguise
Democratic National Committee chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz says fuck it, why pretend.
Bernie Sanders is accusing Democratic National Committee chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz of trying to tip the party convention in Hillary Clinton’s favor, saying the chairwoman has packed the committees with Clinton supporters. In a letter to the chairwoman, Sanders noted that of the 45 names he submitted [as asked by the DNC] to Democratic National Convention committees, Wasserman Schultz appointed only three.
The letter (pdf):
Dear Chairwoman Wasserman Schultz:
I am writing to follow up on our discussion about the composition of the standing committees of the Democratic National Convention. In order to reflect the views and aspirations of the millions who support both my candidacy and Secretary Clinton’s, I believe that the composition of the standing committees must reflect the relative support that has been received by both campaigns.
That was why I was so disappointed to learn that of the over forty people our campaign submitted at your request you chose to select only three of my recommendations for the three standing committees. Moreover, you did not assign even one of the people submitted by our campaign to the very important Rules Committee of the Democratic National Convention.
If we are to have a unified party in the fall, no matter who wins the nomination, we cannot have a Democratic National Convention in which the views of millions of people who participated in the Democratic nominating process are unrepresented in the committee membership appointed by you, the Chair. That sends the very real message that the Democratic Party is not open to the millions of new people that our campaign has brought into the political process, does not want to hear new voices, and is unwilling to respect the broader base of people that this party needs to win over in November and beyond. Fairness, inclusion and transparency should be the standard under which we operate.
In our conversation, you told me with respect to the platform drafting Committee that you would consider allowing each campaign to submit ten names from which you would choose four from each and then you would add an additional seven. While having four members on the Drafting Committee is an improvement, it does not address the fact that up to this point Bernie 2016 has secured some 45% of the pledged delegates awarded. Frankly, we believe that percentage will go up in the coming weeks and, of course, we hope it will end up being a majority.
I believe that each campaign should chose seven members to serve on the Drafting Committee. The fifteenth member would be a chair who would be jointly picked by the two campaigns. This process will ensure that all the standing committees reflect the full range of views of voters who have participated in the Democratic nominating contests.
This process will also ensure that the chairs of the standing committees conduct their proceedings with fairness and transparency. As it stands now, the chairs of the Rules Committee and the Platform Committee are active supporters of Secretary Clinton’s campaign. But even more than that, they both are aggressive attack surrogates on the campaign trail. I do not, and the millions who have supported our campaign will not, have any confidence that either of them will conduct committee proceeding in an even-handed manner. In fact, the suggestion that they would be appropriate chairs in and of itself suggests the standing committees are being established in an overtly partisan way meant to exclude the input of the voters who have supported my candidacy.
As you know, there are already over 9 million voters who, during this nominating process, have indicated that they want to go beyond establishment politics and establishment economics – and want to transform our country with bold initiatives. I will not allow them be silenced at the Democratic National Convention.
It is my hope we can quickly resolve this in a fair way. If the process is set up to produce an unfair, one-sided result, we are prepared to mobilize our delegates to force as many votes as necessary to amend the platform and rules on the floor of the convention.
Thank you in advance for your help in establishing standing committees that are fair and inclusive. I look forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely,
Senator Bernie Sanders
The DNC’s tepid response:
“Because the Party’s platform is a statement of our values, the DNC is committed to an open, inclusive and representative process,” the DNC said in a statement. “Both of our campaigns will be represented on the Drafting Committee, and just as we did in 2008 and 2012, the public will have opportunities to participate”
Wasserman Schultz is despised by all……Obama hates her and most of the D’s. Time for her to walk the plank. Shes a horrible spokesperson for the Party. She was the brains behind almost no debates and holding them on Saturday nights when no one was watching..Disgrace. They are totally stacking deck against Sanders despite his admirable performance in primaries and caucuses.
I’m shocked. SHOCKED! I say, to find out that politicians have agendas.
Gasp. The vapors onset. Faint I feel.
This is not to say I’m a fan of Wasserman-Schultz. I most decidedly am not, but if you want to find folks with agendas, look no further than your local political-party-of-your-choice committee. Heck, I’m on my local political-party-of-my-choice committee. I stay as far away from the policy-making side as I can, because of all the agendas.
The real world is messy and dirty and most decidedly not pure, but it’s the only world we have. If you want purity, avoid politics. If you want to change the world, embrace politics, but don’t expect purity, because you won’t find it there.
@c “She was the brains behind almost no debates…”
Wait… Weren’t the debates repetitive and redundant? Who the heck wanted more of those? Anyone??? They went downhill pretty badly towards the end. The last debate was terrible. Bernie looked desperate and lost control of his rhetoric.
DWS called that one perfectly.
Or maybe we should have another debate??
@c “Wasserman Schultz is despised by all…”
That can’t be right. Doesn’t “ALL” include me? …right??
@n “Debbie Wasserman Schultz says fuck it, why pretend.”
I looked and couldn’t find that part (nor anything like it).
“Weren’t the debates repetitive and redundant? Who the heck wanted more of those? Anyone??? They went downhill pretty badly towards the end. The last debate was terrible. Bernie looked desperate and lost control of his rhetoric.”
Apparently Hillary supporters now have their own narrative to feed their bubble. Hillary is more glib and thus a “better debater” but Bernie has the power of truth.
I thought I read Wasserman Schultz got a primary opponent in Florida because she was too cozy with the payday loan industry folks on some bill. Typical ‘establishment’ Democrat.
any truth to that?
@LE: Uninformed, as usual. You OK with the payday loan industry? No? Then why do you like DWS?
We lost congress on her watch and if Obama hadn’t been such a strong candidate with his organization against a weak one he may have been a one term President. She got the job as a Clinton loyalist in exchange for the Clinton’s active support in 08. There’s no other way to explain it. Her job was to grease the skids for Hillarys coronation and she nearly screwed that up
@a “You OK with the payday loan industry?”
No. They are evil. This is a weak spot for her.
“Then why do you like DWS?”
I guess I just have a thing for smart hard working women.
Sure she’s a partisan hack, but no worse than the bulk of the partisan hacks in congress. They can’t all be on the GOP side…
And she’s on the better side of most issues. Her stance on Israel make a lot more sense than Hillary’s.
And… I believe that had she been a man, we’d not be hearing half of what’s been thrown at her. Just look at her male counterparts and how they seem to get a “pass”. But DWS? Oh no…. must denigrate…
@p “Apparently Hillary supporters now have their own narrative to feed their bubble.”
Did you really want more debates? Do you want more?
“…but Bernie has the power of truth.”
…but no real depth. The debates did expose the absence of any sort of real plan.
Please…..Enough with the “had she been a man” arguments. UGH…just shows how bad DWS has been as Party Chair. Be a congresswoman and let someone else do it. Can’t wear two hats and do the job properly or without conflict.
@c “…or without conflict”
The job comes with conflict. That basically IS the job.
Look at Reince Priebus… conflict all day long, every day.
“No. They are evil. This is a weak spot for her.”
Yes, indeed. Jews were a weak spot for Nazis. Blacks are a weak spot for the Klan. And so on.
You must not realize how stupid you sound. Just insisting that nothing about Democrats bothers you because other people do worse doesn’t make you sound smart or principled. It makes you sound like the kind of “let’s win this game!” dick that we’ve all met before.
You’re not clever, you’re not convincing — you’re a perfect example of why so many of us hate Democrats as much as we do Republicans. Your simple existence creates votes for Trump.
@a “You must not realize how stupid you sound.”
Ha! Talk about hyperbole… You know… Godwin’s law applies here too.
Sorry.. I’m just not going to hate someone for one not so terribly important issue.
And compared to you, at least I’m not getting a large fraction of my facts all wrong… That’s how one really sounds stupid around here.
“I’m just not going to hate someone for one not so terribly important issue.”
I’m puzzled over what makes you self-identify as a liberal. Or one of the elite, for that matter.
You wouldn’t know a fact if one fell in your lap. Ironic, since you’re such a lapdog.