The Extraordinary Promise Of A Progressive Delaware State Senate
We have never seen this before in Dover. Not ever. Yes, we have had progressive legislators in the Delaware General Assembly, but they have consistently faced uphill battles against the Delaware Way and the ‘leadership’ that perpetuates the Delaware Way. Like the leadership of the House D Caucus, which may only be one more election cycle away from disintegration. Three cop lovers, no waiting.
The closest we have ever come to what has happened in the Delaware State Senate was likely the deal that was struck between Sen. Karen Peterson and Patti Blevins back in 2013. In exchange for agreeing to not challenge Blevins for the President Pro-Tempore position, Peterson extracted a promise from Blevins to enable progressive legislation to make its way to the floor. Which was progress, although the composition of the Senate at that time made it difficult to pass a lot of progressive legislation.
This is a whole ‘nother ballgame entirely. How? Let me count the ways:
1. The entire Senate leadership team is comprised of progressives. What’s perhaps most important is that, as the President Pro-Tem, Senator Dave Sokola appoints the membership to all Senate committees, including the Senate members of the Joint Finance Committee and the Bond Bill Committee. He can guarantee that the key committees have enough progressive-minded senators on them to ensure that legislation makes it to the floor. Neither Sokola nor his Caucus are in the mood to bow down to the Governor’s wishes. Meaning, the governor and the House will have to adjust accordingly. No more rubber-stamping the burying of bills. Plus, and this is important, this will be the leadership team that oversees redistricting.
2. The Caucus as a whole is progressive. There is not a single member of the caucus, not one, who is not ‘gettable’ on certain progressive initiatives. Bruce Ennis supports a $15 minimum wage, Trey Paradee sponsors marijuana legalization legislation, Stephanie Hansen supports stronger environmental policy, Nicole Poore…well, that leaves Nicole Poore.
3. Nicole Poore is out of leadership. Her ambition consisted solely of pumping up her pocketbook and her brand. Congratulations, Nicole, you’re the biggest loser.
4. The entire relationship between the Senate and the Governor has changed. Part of the problem with the Delaware Way has been the extent to which the General Assembly has often rolled over to the governor. No, not just John Carney, but every single governor I’ve known from my time in the General Assembly up to now. Oversimplified, but: The governor proposes, the GA disposes. I look for the Senate to be the source of more impactful legislation than either the Governor or the House this session. And, you know what? The legislation is likely not only to be impactful, but popular.
5. These new senators are not your garden-variety senators. Not only are they young, but they are exceedingly accomplished in their chosen fields, and they’ve chosen to run for the senate when they could be making a whole lot more money pretty much anywhere else. Nothing even approaching a retired cop in the bunch. Meaning, they’re not there to bask in the accolades, and they are not there to take the Poore/Longhurst path to financial security. During the Rev’s interview with Kyle Evans Gay (which was before the election), Kyle made the point that she did not view the truncated session that the Democratic leadership foisted on its members this past year as acceptable. I’m sure that she wasn’t just speaking for herself. Which also means that these progressives will be preparing and introducing serious legislation early in the upcoming session with the intent of working it.
6. There is tremendous synergy among the progressive senators (and the progressive House members) who were elected for the first time this year. I think this is something that might have escaped you if you didn’t have some involvement with these campaigns. Campaigns generally take place in their own relatively closed environments. That wasn’t the case this year. The mutual support among these first-time candidates was something I’ve never seen before in all my time in government and in blogging about government. It was exhilarating. Call it the ‘Sisterhood of Synergy’, call it what you want, but it demonstrated a generosity which I think means that there will be far more cooperation among these candidates-turned-officeholders than you might imagine. They’re gonna work together real well.
7. The House Democratic Leadership will be forced out of their comfort zone. Not only will they have to consider progressive legislation coming over from the Senate, they will have to deal with a caucus that is far more progressive than the one that preceded it. The Cop Lovers won’t be able to beat down the dissenters with nightsticks any more. Pete ‘n Val have seen that insurgent candidacies are no joke, and they know that if the next cycle in the House is anything like the one we just experienced, they will no longer be in leadership and, who knows, one or two of them may not even be members of the House come the 2022 election. (That reminds me. A ‘Mo’ Better Democrats’ watchlist is coming soon).
8. The Governor will be forced out of his comfort zone. Since the Senate in part controls the fate of the Governor’s agenda, if he has one this year, they will be in a position to bargain the governor off of his opposition to certain initiatives, perhaps including the legalization of marijuana.
9. An entire litany of progressive legislation will likely be considered this year in the Senate. Higher minimum wage, police reform, criminal justice, environmental justice, economic justice (including perhaps an increase in taxes for Delaware’s wealthiest), gun control, a strengthening of public education for Delaware’s most at-risk students, and a lot more.
The first regularly-scheduled legislative session day is Tuesday, January 12, 2021. I can’t wait.
I’d much rather have this Assembly than any in recent memory. That said, the progressivism of the new members will be tested by their handling of education bills. I’m concerned by Sokola’s fealty to charter schools and the inequity and systemic racism they represent.
This Assembly may be the one called on to enact long-term education reforms and education funding reforms. Sokola will make sure the mostly segregated charter schools get a generous piece of any funding pie, and I fear many if not all the new members will go along without a whimper.
My biggest issue with the leadership of the Senate is Dave Sokola. While he is very progressive on many issues when it comes to education he is VERY charter school friendly. He has opposed many bills that would reduce discrimination in education. More specifically he will protect Newark Charter School at any cost. He has also blocked education legislation that would have given teachers an out on the very punitive actions in their scoring system. That component of the scoring system is based on the Smarter Balanced Assessment which is and always has been a joke. He ferociously opposed a parents right to have their child out of that test. I fear what could happen in education with him calling the shots in the Senate. If he has changed his stance on these kind of things please let me know.
I think Dave Sokola was chosen Pro-Tem because he is a steady hand. He’s been a consistent progressive w/o being a firebrand, and he is universally trusted.
I understand your concern, and it’s something worth watching. However, with public education advocates like Bryan Townsend, Marie Pinkney, Laura Sturgeon and others in that caucus, I doubt that he will try to impose his views on the caucus.
BTW, Kevin, in this case hyperbole is not your friend. He has never ‘ferociously opposed’ any such thing, and I think you know it.
On education issues where charter schools are involved, Sokola votes with Republicans, against the progressive position. That’s the price we pay for the “steady hand.”
I beg to differ on the perspective of “ferociously opposed”. Yes, he wasn’t yelling and putting his foot down when it came to progressive education legislation. It was more a matter of distraction and refocus, away from the heart of the issues. I was there to see it. If it was about opt-out, teacher evaluations, and Newark Charter School, you could count on the games. That was what I meant by ferocious.
Better for sure, but as long as the cop lovers are in place in the house it is all for naught. Yes the senate will send progressive bills to the house, but yes the hated Swartzkopf will use the thousand and one games of the hated Delaware Way to bury said bills.
I disagree, at least a little. The House caucus is more progressive, and even the cop lovers who still run the place have to retain enough support to keep their positions.
Not to mention, the House will pass bills it wants the Senate to consider.
Meaning, the cop lovers don’t have the leverage they once had.
We still need, however, at least one more cycle where progressives challenge the dead weight over there.
“the cop lovers don’t have the leverage they once had” They had enough leverage to keep two cops and PAL Longhurst in leadership. If they roll over that easy, I’m not excited about progress in the House.
Verdict is out on Townsend