Gaming Out The Delaware State Senate’s Leadership Contest
OK, kids, this should be fascinating. According to Matt Bittle at the Delaware State News, the Senate Democrats are expected to choose their leadership team sometime this week. There are 14 D senators. We know that the ethically-bankrupt Nicole Poore wants to be Pro-Tem, and we know that the progressive members of the caucus want–someone else. We don’t know who the someone else could be. I’d like to see it be Dave Sokola, who is calm and respected, but word on the street is that he’s not inclined to seek the position. C’mon, Dave, step up!
So, let’s try to see which senators will be in which camp. I have a better handle on the progressive side, and they will have a strong degree of unity. I think they are as follows:
Sarah McBride
Laura Sturgeon
Kyle Evans Gay
Dave Sokola
Marie Pinkney
Bryan Townsend
Spiros Mantzavinos (probable)
That’s, you got it, 7 out of 14.
On the side of Nicole (No Longer) Poore:
Darius Brown
Jack Walsh
Stephanie Hansen
Nicole Poore
Bruce Ennis
Trey Paradee.
On the fence:
Tizzy Lockman.
A caveat: I’m more certain of those in the progressive camp than those in Poore’s camp. Who knows, maybe Darius will realize that he could (should) face a primary from a progressive and fall in line. First time for everything. You would also think that Tizzy would be a ‘lock’ for the progressive side, but she has been less predictable than many of her supporters might have hoped.
I don’t think that the Thurman Adams ploy of threatening to take it to the floor where the Rethugs could participate is in play this time. We no longer have that cadre of downstate D senators.
This is more than just an exercise. The Senate leadership will determine whether, for example, the bills that Dave McBride and Nicole Poore buried stay buried. The leadership will also determine whether progressive legislation will get a fair hearing this term.
I think that House leadership may remain the same, with someone taking the place of Larry Mitchell on the team. The name of Melissa Minor-Brown has surfaced for that position.
What are any of you hearing?
Sincere questions: What makes you think Spiros will be progressive? And what makes you doubt Tizzy Lockman’s progressivism?
All I can say is, I talk to people. And did in this case.
Nothing however, is set in stone. I didn’t say that Spiros would ‘be progressive’, just wrote that he was likely to join the progressives in the leadership battle.
I’m with Alby on this one. If Spiros is leaning progressive, then Tizzy is definitely in this bloc. If Sokola’s the best they’ve got, I can see a few members pining for someone else, but this is Delaware, so the member with the most progressive chops, Sarah McBride, is not going to be thrust into a leadership role a week after her election.
I also detect a gender split within this grouping. The three males are best known on the outside for their corporate/business connections.
Y’know, it would be real cool to have Sarah thrust into that position. Her coalition-building at both the state and federal level has well prepared her for such a jump.
Yes, it would be out-of-character for the General Assembly, but the new Senate is by far the most progressive body I’ve ever seen in Dover.
So, why not?
Well, the “why not” is because “most progressive ever” still doesn’t translate to Bernie, Warren and the Squad.
Townsend and Sokola are progressive in the sense that they’re a step to the left of Delaware’s 3Cs (ain’t it great how Carper, Coons and Carney have replaced chickens, cars and corporations?) and Spiros has long been a shill for businesses, including the refinery outside Delaware City.
That said, might be fun for Sarah to be in charge, but I’d hate to see her crash and burn at the hands of the remaining reactionaries in the caucus.
I think you’re underestimating the extent of the sea change that we’re seeing. Not to mention, Sokola and Townsend are not just slightly to the left of the three C’s. Their records are more progressive than that.
Yes, there would be a learning curve for Sarah, but there’s no chance she would crash and burn.
I know that, in situations like this, I tend to sometimes get over my skis. But, I’m really excited about the leadership role that the Senate can assume. Definitely more of a force than the governor.
“On the fence” is Tizzy’s middle name. Wait until the issue is decided and she’ll swoop right in.
“…progressive members of the caucus want–someone else”
Who?
Anyone but Poore. Like I said, I think Sokola would be the logical choice, but it doesn’t seem like he wants it.
Thats my point. If you are going to include Townsend as a possible progressive you’d have to include him as possible challengers to Poore, but he’d have to want it.
I think Townsend sees himself as perhaps more of a lightning rod, and thinks someone less controversial might be more palatable.
On Friday Oct. 30th (five days before election day) the Dem. Caucus received a notice that we would be convening a caucus meeting to select leadership on November 5th (a day and a half after the election). This action is without precedent and I cannot be silent about this potential abuse of power by the Speaker. Below I have copied and pasted the email that I sent to all of the current caucus members on Oct. 30th. To date I have not received any response.
Dear fellow caucus members,
“I am reaching out to each of you to convey my feelings regarding having a leadership selection vote on November 5th. We may be welcoming as many as five newly elected members to join our caucus and I sincerely believe it would be disrespectful to them and other members of our caucus to convene a leadership vote so hastily. Historically, before the 2018 elections, these leadership votes were not conducted before newly elected members and incumbents could discuss the options and nuances available to them. I hope that the current leadership will consider the fact that the Democratic Party is the party of all of its parts and the true democratic process is best served with a reasonable dialogue, discussion and period for consideration of all options. There is no discernible reason to require such an important decision be made so soon after the election results have been registered. I am asking all of you to join me in requesting that a leadership vote be delayed for at least two weeks and preferably longer after the November 3rd election. Please join me in requesting that this most important decision be reasonably delayed so that a coherent and honest dialogue can be conducted”.
Respectfully,
Representative John Kowalko
Didn’t they do the exact same thing last time?
Yes but never prior to that.
John Kowalko
“…without precedent” except for that one time. Kay.
We need a ‘like’ button.
Never within two days of the election, ever, “WITHOUT PRECEDENT”
Rep. Kowalko
John, have you ever poked fun at yourself in your life?
Yeah but this persistent willingness to abuse power by intimidation, coercion, promises of rewards has a draining effect on my sense of humor over the past eight years and counting. It’s not jealousy, envy or self-pity. It’s witnessing year after year the failure of a super majority holding Democrat caucus to allow a $15 hr. minimum wage bill to the floor, to refuse to allow a repeal of the Ramone training wage exemption, to refuse to consider a no chokeholds no kneeholds policy without excuse or exemption, to refuse to allow additional tax bracket creating bills for floor consideration (and vote), to refuse to allow independent redistricting proposals to see the light of day, to refuse to allow any reform of LLC licensing laws because the Corporate Bar Commission makes millions of dollars turning a blind eye to drug runners, money-launderers, and fraud perpetrators, to refuse to allow any bill, policy or legislation (that favors people over corporations) out of a desk-drawer that only Thurman Adams and Jim Vaughn could envy. Yeah I find it difficult to poke fun at the dismantling of Democrat idealism by Democrats. I would gladly take a pie in the face and a bucket of water on my head if that laughter at my predicament came with a serious dose of courage to remove this stain on my principles.
John Kowalko
John makes a good point. Dem leadership protects Republicans by keeping major issues off the legislative floor, so nobody ever has to take a vote they can be criticized for.
Last week my son (a first-time voter) realized he didn’t know much about local politics. so he went looking for Mike Smith’s voting record. It’s actually pretty anodyne, and lacking in the major hot-button issues my son was more familiar with. I said “Welcome to the Delaware Way. “
I’d bet anything that his votes will be much less anodyne come election day 2022