Usually after elections, there must be the counting (and sometimes recounting), and the obligatory, if not always enlightening, analysis. With the end of last week’s battles, there are two salient facts beyond debate. First, the fight over “Little Saigon” was traumatic for the city and more so for the hopes of Vietnamese-American candidates. And second, the attempts of the Democratic establishment to boost and support candidates that would be solidly in their camp failed miserably with the crushing of Craig Mann in the Evergreen district.
The first result does not hold a silver lining for anyone or any group. It was the result of an electorate that just thought the issue was absurd, as most majorities feel about ethics politics in America. Thank God that cooler heads stepped back from a citywide election that would have been horrible and divisive beyond belief.
Yet, in the defeat of a man of dubious record there may be some positives for all. The long and winding road from Terry Gregory to Craig Mann crossed over the barely-warm body of the “mayor in name only,” Ron Gonzales. Labor, and the Democratic Party apparatus controlled by them, propped them up like cadavers. They have had it their way so long, that I think they mistook the incompetence of their opponents and the dearth of any rational opposing philosophy as a triumph of their strategy. Wrong! Apparatchiks in their organization controlled the rump of the Gonzales council, and Cindy Chavez was, far and away, the most competent operative in the city for that time.
But that was then. The change that occurred was tectonic—first in the citizens’ revulsion to Gonzales’s style of leadership, and personal in the advent of Pat Dando as leader of the Chamber of Commerce. Dando understood that if the void continued, the city council would become home to the clueless and the corrupt, led by a few competent members squarely in the camp of labor. In other words, the Terry Gregorys, Craig Manns and Manny Diazes would be the norm. Dando aggressively fought fire with fire, broke some eggs, and won. It was helpful that the labor forces were tied to Gregory and Gonzales—fatal to the hopes of the Chavez candidacy—and fortunate that the Chamber had Reed and Pandori leading the reform efforts. (The trivial candidacy of Michael Mulcahy is only a footnote, although a curious one, in all this. ) Dando and the Chamber are clearly the force to look to in the coming years, if they do not duplicate the hubris that affected the labor movement.
As to labor, there are some hopeful signs and, despite a haughtiness that puts many off, the South Bay Labor Council’s Phaedra Ellis- Lamkins can clearly lead them from the middle of this wilderness. If she is as astute as she should be, the course away from the Gregorys and Diazes should lead to more candidates like Tony West, the young and talented lawyer marked out by labor for extinction in two local elections ( and maybe on his way to the White House with Barack Obama). They have to realize that a Democratic Party that has no room for Tony West or David Pandori, Sam Liccardo or Chuck Reed, is a weakened presence in the city and valley, and in the pocket of the lame and those that purchase them. They may continue to have the money, polling, minions and “swift-boating” blog site (they can ruin, yet, not build), but they do not have the wind at their backs, or the support of San Jose voters. If Ellis-Lamkins realizes this and readjusts, she can lead the way to a better role for labor, and a better city for us all.
Tom,
You will find that there are many in the Democratic Party (and I mean the Central Committee, not the Labor Council, as often as the two are seen as one in the same) who admire Sam Liccardo and will vigorously support his re-election to the Council.
Similarly there are many Democrats in the local party who want to work with Chuck Reed but may just be a bit weary of his past actions. Speaking at the Dem State Convention helped him, endorsing Hon Lien a year ago did not.
I think you overestimate the Little Saigon effect, at least in the District 8 race. The three VN candidates garnered nearly 30% of the vote, well ahead of the run-off candidates. The issue in D8 was that there were three VN running. If there had been only one, it’s likely that that candidate would have made it to November.
Your analysis confuses me. Every one of the Democratic Party’s endorsed candidates save one was victorious last week. So you pick the one that did not win to generalize about a party’s success? Also, you forget that the party endorsed Sam Liccardo, over labor’s objection. The idea that the party cannot embrace Liccardo is silly. Also, what “swift-boating” blog site does the party operate? The party’s blog is at sccdp.org/blog.php.
David
The Democratic Party locally has spent far too much time and energy propping up the “Terry Gregorys” and other such flawed candidates, and not enough time reaching out to the Reed-Liccardo-Pandori types of smart, aggressive candidates. Can any rational person justify why Tony West was driven out of local politics by the powers of the Dem.-Labor establishment? And in favor of Manny Diaz? As far as endorsing most winners – who, Nancy Pyle and others who ran virtually unopposed? The leadership of the Democratic Party here should care more c. the next generation and less c. the next election. TMcE
The Democratic Party’s endorsed candidates won every *contested* election in the County on June 3, from AD 22 to San Jose District 2, to both Supervisor seats. The only exception was San Jose District 8, and I expect the party to endorse the eventual winner in the runoff. You can’t win ‘em all, but the party does win most, cycle after cycle. Our candidates continually win and move up the ladder.
The party actually does work closely with Sam Liccardo, Pierluigi Oliverio, and has reached out to Chuck Reed, and will continue to do so.
Next generation? The party worked hard for Ash Kalra in District 2, like Liccardo an up-and-coming star. Where was the Chamber in District 2? Silent. And how did the Republicans do in these races? In District 2, their candidate came in behind one who dropped out. And they were no-shows in the Supervisor races. So who’s irrelevant? And in case you forget, just last year you and your friends at the Chamber and the Republican Party supported Hon Lien, a horrid candidate with nothing to offer San Jose.
Dave
Ah, “my friends in the Republican Party” – let me be clear: I am not now nor have I ever been a member of the Republican Party. They are irrelevant in most local races,our version of the Whigs, period. Please don’t use this as an excuse for the Democratic/Labor support of those mentioned already, at the expense of the Tony Wesst or Sam Liccardos – the Democratic Party has to stand for principles beyond just winning or getting the most money; it has to speak out on reform, not just social justice; and it has to walk the walk when it comes to endorsing good people not just good puppets. TMcE
Charging the local Democratic Party with irrelevance is quite a stretch.
It is a fairer accusation that they have lost their way, dropping concern for the poor and replacing it with concern for public employee unions.
Where to start? First of all could you define “Democratic establishment.” I am part of the SCCDCC, and supported Sam Liccardo, made calls for him, knocked on doors for him, and think he is a great DEMOCRAT. As a matter of fact there was a whole group of SCCDCC members who helped to stop a sole endorsement of Diaz, and we were successful.
Every two years many members of our SCCDCC must go before the voters, and the top six are elected to serve a two year term. This year there were three AD’s that went to the ballot, the 21st, 23rd and 24th. The registered Democrats of this county elect us to represent their voice in the Democratic Party, and when we are elected we serve with no pay, and we all volunteer endless hours helping our candidates.
If you are to measure how the chamber is “clearly the force,” should you not consider their endorsement of Hon Lien, the absolutely worst candidate to have run for office in San Jose. How is it that the chamber is such a force when they continually back unqualified candidates? The chamber’s record of having their endorsed candidates elected is not even 50/50, though, if they had decent political leadership these numbers would be much better.
And why do you fail to mention the record of the local GOP? What “winners” have the GOP come up with lately? If you, for some reason, have forgotten, they also endorsed Hon Lien, and if you can’t remember how bad she was, watch the youtube video to refresh your memory:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWEhlRC1va4
or this one
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlPxgSfHzXQ
And who does the GOP endorse in D2? Ram Singh, who (as of this post) lost to someone who was not even running a campaign. Singh also had no community support, few endorsements other then the GOP and had no clue about some of the most pressing issues in D2. When asked what his thoughts were on the deal currently being considered between Lew Wolff and San Jose (in which Lew Wolff would build a stadium in exchange for industrial land in edenvale being rezoned as residential), Singh had no knowledge of this issue. None.
Most, if not all, of us who serve on the SCCDCC are working folks who want to help get good Democrats elected to office. We volunteer our time, energy and money (when we can) to help our endorsed candidates, and we actively seek out good Democrats to run for office. We are the people you see registering voters, knocking on doors, making phone calls. We work hard because we believe in the Democratic Party and the values it stands for, we aren’t the establishment, we are the people.
Jacquie-
Kudos to you for heling stop a sole endorsement of Diaz, and I agree that the local DCC and SBLC have power.
But look what they do with it.
Poor people are being forced out of the county in droves. But we have some of the most generous union contracts in the state. Both are caused by local Democratic city councils.
Are we the party of poor people or the party of public employee unions?
I’ve become increasingly disgusted with the Democratic Party over the past several years. There is nothing “democratic” about them; that is why I’m changing my party affiliation to Independent.
I don’t think any leader from either party has room to talk about their great achievements:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1EXKLVgEx0
Tom –
I think you are missing the big picture. I think this is a larger issue than just Democrat vs. Republican or Labor vs. the Chamber. US companies are outsourcing their jobs to other countries like Southeast Asia, where labor costs are cheaper, and they are importing more goods and services than they are exporting. Also, companies are merging constantly, making these huge, mega-corporations that are solely driven by profit, and less by providing the service or goods that got them their start. How would you like it if a foreign company came over here, bought up your business, or a business that competed with yours, and ran it more successfully, and more cost efficiently than you could? How would you compete with that? Would you resort to outsourcing your labor costs, and shipping jobs overseas to take advantage of cheap labor, while getting huge tax breaks as a reward to do so?
Increasingly, the goods and products we buy and use are made overseas, not in America. They are closing US plants, and moving those jobs overseas, increasing the amount of goods and services that are imported; that we have to rely on. Our jobless rate is at an all time high. It is a vicious cycle that we are stuck in, and the only way to fix it is to work together. Each side – labor and business, Democrat and Republican – has good points that we can use to put this country back on the right track. We need to see these groups work TOGETHER, and stop this myopic view of Us VS Them. This bipartisan bickering makes losers out of us all.
Christian
I could not agree w. you more. For eight years I served as mayor and never asked or accepted Democratic support. I viewed it as a ‘job’ not a political career, and did not need partisan baggage – I defy anyone to detect by my record whether I was a Dem or Rep or IND. I support people not parties. I am saddened when the Democratic establishment and Labor, so full of good ideas and good people, support the least qualified candidates like Gregory and Mann, just bec. they can control them – it is the essence of what is wrong w. the city and nation. Our national politics is a joke and a disgrace – I pray we can do better in San Jose, but it takes good people who put aside partisanship. There is hope here, but we need altruism and unselfishness to restore our economy and our confidence. TMcE