Green Revolution on the Golden Gate

San Francisco Mayor Criticized for Visit to Occupy Camp
April 27, 2011

SAN FRANCISCO - It has been a month since the Occupy protest movement began. Since the March Down Montgomery that launched the movement on March 20, protesters in San Francisco have been continuously encamped at the proverbial heart of the Occupy movement, the Banker’s Heart sculpture in A. P. Giannini Plaza. While other protest camps have emerged at a couple other locations in the city, the Banker’s Heart has become viewed as the most notorious for its role in launching the movement and for its symbolism in the outrage against Wall Street’s role in the 2008 financial crash. Earlier this week, San Francisco mayor Matt Gonzalez paid a visit to the Banker’s Heart camp, a bold move for any politician but especially a big city mayor. This is not new for the mayor though. Gonzalez’s entire political career has been a string of bold moves, and typical to his career, Gonzalez’s visit sparked a strong reaction from others in not just San Francisco but in California and nationwide.

In the statement he made at Giannini Plaza on Monday, Gonzalez spoke from what seems to be an earnest place of support for the broader goals of the Occupy movement and from what he has referred to as a long career as a public servant “fighting for the little guy” in the public defender's office and as a Green Party county supervisor and mayor. He applauded the broader goals of the movement, calling on state and national officials to lower the cost of a college education, tackle income inequality, fight for social and economic justice, and make democracy more accessible. The mayor also reportedly talked with the ad hoc leaders of the Giannini Plaza camp and announced to the group of assembled demonstrators in front of the Banker’s Heart that he would be issuing an indefinite permit of protest for the Giannini Plaza camp as well as for protest areas in Embarcadero Plaza and in Civic Center Plaza in front of city hall. Gonzalez did not say conclusively whether he would okay further protests in Saint Mary’s Square, the larger park near Giannini Plaza where Occupy San Francisco has since made its headquarters, but there have been some concerns voiced by nearby residents over noise, safety, and cleanliness.

The mayor making a statement at the Occupy camp, talking to its local organizers, and his extension of indefinite protest permitting is a surprisingly overt gesture of support for the Occupy movement. Despite the general political support from many Democrats and Greens for the movement, there has been little of such support granted by any city or state official. Gonzalez is the first mayor to speak at an Occupy camp, a decision which came after Oakland police violently dispersed the camp in front of Oakland City Hall last week and sparked fears among demonstrators elsewhere that a nationwide crackdown on Occupy camps would follow. The alleged police brutality at the Oakland camp sparked condemnations from a number of prominent local politicians including former HUD Secretary Barbara Lee and former state assemblywoman Angela Davis, both of whom have since spoken at renewed Occupy demonstrations in Oakland. Oakland mayor Wilson Riles Jr. also condemned the actions of Oakland police and of police chief Anthony Batts in how the department handled the dispersal of the camp.

Mayor Gonzalez’s statement to Occupy San Francisco also echoed a continued commitment by the San Francisco mayor to “keep defending the civil liberties and right to protest of all Americans” that Gonzalez says he has maintained ever since his career as a public defender began. Many particularly on the left and in the Occupy movement applauded the mayor's statement, but others including fellow San Francisco and California leaders voiced a disapproval of the mayor’s visit to the Banker’s Heart. California governor Darrell Issa, who has taken a hardline stance against the Occupy protests since they erupted, roundly condemned Gonzalez for his visit and called the blanket issuing or permits “allowing groups in violation of San Francisco’s laws to run roughshod over laws the city’s voters overwhelmingly upheld” referring to the city's camping ban. Issa also questioned why Gonzalez would “enthusiastically endorse the noise disturbances and nuisances affecting his constituents.”[1] San Francisco Sheriff Michael Hennessey called Gonzalez’s visit “reckless and irresponsible” and lamented requiring the use of stretched police resources to ensure the mayor’s safety on “a purely political stunt.” Hennessey is currently running for mayor of San Francisco to succeed Gonzalez. Hennessey also said that Gonzalez’s visit gave tacit support to an impromptu defensive measure that the Occupy camps in San Francisco have put up to make police attempts to control any developing situation more difficult. Last year, the ban on overnight parking was lifted through a voter-approved change in the city ordinance. After the police raided the Occupy camp in Oakland, protesters at the Banker’s Heart parked cars along the streets adjacent to the plaza in a sort of makeshift barricade. The cars parked on the side of California Street through the night are technically not running afoul of city law so removing them cannot be legally enforced. Hennessey accused Gonzalez of routinely undermining police readiness in San Francisco through his actions in visiting the camp and in spearheading the recent changes to the city ordinances.

For his part, mayor Gonzalez reiterated that he never felt in danger during his visit to the Banker’s Heart. Gonzalez has also had the support of a majority of the county board of supervisors, including one or two Democratic members. A resolution in support of the Occupy Movement sponsored by John Avalos, a more moderate Green supervisor who is also running for mayor, passed the board of supervisors 8 to 3 a few days ago. One of the three opposing the resolution, Sean Elsbernd, said that while he supports many of the issues brought up by the Occupy Movement, the city should not be encouraging demonstrators to expand their actions with such resolutions[2]. Occupy Movement protesters in the Bay Area said they were thankful for the support of mayors Gonzalez and Riles in San Francisco and Oakland, but that cities are sending very mixed messages between the positions taken by the mayors, city councilors, and police. Despite this though, organizers at the Occupy camps across the Bay Area have said they will not be ending their fight any time soon.

***

Jack Layton Elected Canadian Prime Minister as NDP Surges To Majority
May 2, 2011

OTTAWA, CANADA - Canadian voters delivered an historic result in today’s election as, for the first time ever, the New Democratic Party won the most seats in parliament. On top of that, Canadians have given the NDP a majority and confirmed outright that Jack Layton will be the next Prime Minister of Canada. The NDP won 161 seats, a slim majority of seven, but still their first government formation in the fifty years of the party's existence. Tonight’s result demonstrates a meteoric rise for the NDP with an increase of 117 seats from the result of the 2009 election. The 2009 election result had already been hailed a success for the party and Layton's leadership with Layton netting the NDP their highest ever seat total in parliament two years ago. After tonight, however, Layton’s legacy is surely sealed as he brought the NDP from a low point of nearly losing official party status to becoming the first ever NDP Prime Minister.

Layton has been leader of the NDP since 2003 and has presided over a nearly steady rise in the party’s fortunes over the past decade. After taking over the party when they had just 13 seats in parliament from the 2000 election, Layton shepherded the party to a continuous rise during the Harper ministry to a previous high point of 44 seats after 2009. This year, Layton took the opportunity of timely Canadian dissatisfaction with both the Conservatives and Liberals. After Stephen Harper’s resignation from the Conservative leadership following his defeat in 2009, the Tories selected Rona Ambrose as the party's new leader. With the precarious position the Liberal government held given the makeup of parliament, the Tories were able to wield somewhat effective influence over Dion’s agenda in opposition both in opposing bills backed by the NDP and supporting more centrist bills that the NDP would oppose. When it came to campaign time though, the recent memory of Harper plus Ambrose’s continued message of austerity and tax cuts failed to give the Tories the boost they needed in a Canada still not recovered from the 2009 recession. This made Layton the more effective opposition to Dion during the election campaign. In addition, Layton led the NDP in a strong push for expanding the party’s presence in Quebec, something which Layton laid the groundwork for early in his leadership of the party. A surprise electoral collapse of the Bloc Quebecois also helped the NDP break through in the province. While Dion kept the Liberals afloat in Montreal, the NDP won a shocking 55 ridings in Quebec overall, nearly a third of their nationwide seat total.

For the Liberals and Prime Minister Dion, the loss may be a case of it being more difficult to be the one who was supposed to fix a mess than it is to be the one who got into the mess in the first place. Dion’s government with just 109 seats for the Liberals after the 2009 election was in an extremely tenuous position to begin with, and for some it was a surprise that the government lasted as long as it did before an election was forced. While opinions on the Liberal government were sympathetic to begin with as most Canadians saw Dion as at least better than Harper, that opinion quickly shifted as the sluggish economy continued and little was done to bring Canada meaningfully out of the recession. Come this year, it seems Canadians had enough of Dion, no matter how constrained a position he was in. Dion’s inability to act, coupled with the rise of the Occupy protests that spread to Canadian cities during the election campaign, led to a surge in support for the NDP.

The election also was good news for Elizabeth May and the Greens. After winning a surprising upset in Central Nova two years ago, May has been working to expand the Green base of support in Atlantic Canada. The effort has already created results as the Greens gained two seats today, both in the Maritimes. Along with May winning reelection, Mary Lou Babineau was elected in the Fredericton riding in New Brunswick, and Peter Bevan-Baker was elected in the Malpeque riding on Prince Edward Island. Baker’s win is part of a curious result in PEI. After twenty years of having only Liberal representation in parliament, Prince Edward Island will now send members of four different parties from its four ridings. Along with Baker in Malpeque, Cardigan has reelected Liberal Lawrence MacAulay, Charlottetown elected NDP candidate Joe Byrne, and in Egmont, Conservative candidate former MLA Gail Shea defeated former premier Keith Milligan, who was selected by the Liberal Party after MP Joe McGuire decided to retire from politics.

***

“Occupy” Movement’s Spread to Seattle Brings Worrying Echo of WTO Protests
May 2, 2011

SEATTLE - It has now been six weeks since the fateful March Down Montgomery protest in San Francisco kicked off what is now known nationwide as the Occupy Movement. In San Francisco, the center of the protest movement and the site of the largest gatherings in the movement so far, protesters have set up a camp at the Banker's Heart sculpture in the city’s financial district that has remained for most of the time since the first protest, though a larger and more consistently occupied camp has been set up half a block away at the more spacious Saint Mary’s Square. In Oakland, the camp at Frank Ogawa Plaza has been cleared twice, but has since returned after the violent police action in the second clearance of the park led to a protest march and brief union-supported strike in the Port of Oakland and a reoccupation of the park site. Other large protests associated with the Occupy Movement have had hundreds of members present in cities across the country including Los Angeles, Chicago, Washington D.C., New York, and Boston. Meanwhile, protests in other smaller cities have been smaller or have been successfully dispersed either by police or by a lack of staying power including in Seattle. Last week though, another attempt to launch an Occupy protest in the city gained a much larger and more organized following. Some Seattle residents have expressed a growing concern that with the new Occupy demonstrations, Seattle could be headed toward a situation similar to the 1999 WTO protests that rocked the city.

The biggest concerns arose from nearby downtown residents and businesses after the protests seem to have coalesced around a single location. While in the first weeks following the March Down Montgomery there were smaller protests in front of the Federal Building and Columbia Center and a brief camp in Westlake Park that dispersed after a few days, the new protest camp at Freeway Park seems to be more lasting. Last week, hundreds of protesters gathered at the park overlooking the I-5 tunnel next to the Washington State Convention Center. The choice of Freeway Park as a more permanent location for the Occupy camp in Seattle shows that the comparisons to the WTO protests does not seem to be lost on the Occupy Movement either. The convention center was in 1999 the host site of the WTO conference that led to the infamous anti-globalization protests. The three days of protests, vandalism, and clashes with police around the convention center became known as the Battle of Seattle and resulted in an estimated $3 million in cleanup costs for the city and $20 million in lost sales to local businesses[3]. The WTO protests also gave the city of Seattle a marked reputation for which some city officials argue it has still not recovered from as a place to do business.

With that in mind, the concerns expressed by residents of nearby apartment complexes and of the businesses surrounding the Washington State Convention Center are not to be taken lightly by city administrators. Many residents and businesses were here in 1999 and say they were victims of the five days of violent protests. Of additional concern to the surrounding business and business leaders across Seattle is the worry that a prolonged Occupy camp in the city could lead to strikes. The strike yesterday at the Port of Oakland shows that these fears are well founded. After the police dispersion of the Occupy camp at Oakland City Hall on April 21, a further protest against the alleged hard tactics used in clearing the camp was planned for May Day. The strike did go ahead yesterday at the Port of Oakland, blocking the gates and stopping trucks from entering or leaving the port. Multiple notable local politicians joined the Occupy demonstrators at the strike, including former Green state assemblywoman Angela Davis and former HUD Secretary Barbara Lee[4]. Many understandably feared that the Occupy Oakland strike would spread to other cities, and some of the support for Occupy shown by some city officials has not helped with concerns expressed by local business leaders and local chambers of commerce. In particular here in Seattle, the support for Occupy coming from mayor Mike McGinn has attracted a significant amount of pushback.

McGinn, one of the few elected Green Party mayors of a major American city, has strongly supported the Occupy protests since the March Down Montgomery on March 20 launched the nationwide demonstrations and protest camps. At first, McGinn only made statements of support and gave his signature to a resolution passed by the city council commending the overall policy goals of the Occupy Movement. This week, however, mayor McGinn escalated his level of support, visiting the Occupy Seattle protest camp at Freeway Park and giving a speech there. McGinn's visit follows similar visits to Occupy camps by San Francisco mayor Matt Gonzalez and Oakland mayor Wilson Riles Jr. in the past week. McGinn echoed the support of his fellow Green mayors, saying that he welcomes the Occupy Movement’s “fight for jobs and justice” and urged the protesters and curious onlookers to continue their activism. McGinn also took the opportunity to do a little naked politicking. In the speech, McGinn talked about the leadup to the Great Recession, saying that “a small portion of the population was doing their best to grab a bigger share of a shrinking pie”, and “politicians from both the Democrat and Republican parties didn’t then and still don’t have the guts to do anything about it.”[5] With this kind of rhetoric from Seattle’s Green mayor, the worries coming from business leaders and concerned citizens will likely not be going away any time soon. Recently, the demonstrators at Freeway Park have hung a banner where I-5 passes under the park reading what has become the most well known Occupy slogan, "Protect People Not Profits."[6]

***

Clinton Gets a Primary Challenger in NAACP President
May 12, 2011

BOWIE, MD - In front of a packed auditorium at Bowie State University, Benjamin Jealous wove a story of family history that spans the breadth of America. He began with his white father’s ancestors, who fought at Lexington and Concord in the earliest days of the Revolutionary War. Jealous then talked about his mother’s ancestry, starting with Peter Morgan, a slave who purchased his freedom and after the Civil War helped write Virginia’s new state constitution. Jealous's parents lived in Maryland until they moved to Monterey, California to be able to get married. Jealous’s mother is black and his father is white, and at the time Maryland still banned interracial marriages. Jealous himself grew up in Monterey before going to college at Columbia. Since graduating from college, Jealous has worked on civil rights issues all across the country, from Harlem to Monterey to Jackson, Mississippi. In 2008, Jealous was chosen at just 35 years old to become the youngest ever president of the NAACP. He then moved from Jackson, where he had been an editor on the Jackson Advocate, a black newspaper in the city, to the Baltimore area. The move to Baltimore brought Jealous full circle to his parents’ home state nearly half a century after they left. As the story caught up to the present, the impassioned young leader announced to the crowd that he would be adding an ambitious new story to his family’s long legacy. Benjamin Jealous, at just 38 years old, announced he is running for the Democratic nomination for president in 2012.

The choice of Bowie for Jealous’s presidential campaign announcement may seem a bit out of the way from Baltimore or Washington DC, but it holds a strong significance to the kind of message Jealous wants to send in his campaign. Bowie State University, founded in 1865, is the oldest historically black college or university, or HBCU, in the United States. As with his stories of how civil rights activism and fighting for justice runs deep in his family, Jealous is tapping into an increasing frustration among both progressives and African-Americans with the Clinton administration’s record on economic, social, and environmental issues. The country may be slowly recovering from the Great Recession, but the effects of the recession and the rate of recovery is incredibly lopsided according to studies by economists, with black workers being much more heavily affected in the short and long terms. Overall unemployment has finally dipped below 10 percent in the US, but among black workers that rate is still over 18 percent. For white workers, the rate is around 8 percent. Among young workers the disparity is even more stark. Unemployment for white workers between the ages of 18 and 24 fell under 15 percent as of March. However, among black workers the unemployment of the same age group is still over 33 percent, or one third of those who are actively seeking jobs. Additionally, over half of unemployed black workers have been unemployed for over six months, a similar feature for all groups throughout the Great Recession but one that has been falling for other populations. The passage of the economic recovery package and healthcare overhaul by president Clinton, while lauded by the president as a strong step toward universal healthcare coverage, has not done much to alleviate these concerns for groups still heavily affected by the lasting impact of the recession. The employer mandate for health insurance may be significant, but it leaves unemployed people still without guaranteed access to health insurance. Additionally, the public option is still in the early stages of its rollout and many people have reported difficulty finding coverage networks or healthcare providers in their area due to a reluctance of hospitals and doctors to sign onto the public option.

The first statements by the Jealous presidential campaign and his recently launched campaign website have given a clear intent to tap into this growing frustration with the reforms of the Clinton administration not reaching the people who need it the most. According to political observers, it also may be trying to tap into a tinge of buyer’s remorse from many Democratic voters looking back with hindsight and thinking that Barack Obama was the better choice in 2008. Polling earlier this year found that Senator Obama was the strongest of several potential primary challengers against president Clinton. There was also speculation, while it has now proven unfounded, after the midterms that Clinton would dump vice president Tom Daschle for her reelection campaign and pick Senator Obama as her running mate for the 2012 elections. The regret of Clinton rather than Obama is small but not insignificant with as many as 21 percent of Democrats in one recent poll saying they would rather have Senator Obama as president now. While Jealous’s campaign is still a long shot, data like this and the strength of the Occupy Movement in the past months does indicate there might be room for a progressive lane in the 2012 primaries as a challenge to Clinton.

The workings of launching a Benjamin Jealous presidential campaign have been going on for months. Ever since Al Sharpton launched his own campaign for the Democratic nomination in March, it has been an open question of whether a more serious candidate would also step in. Jealous is at least trying to be that candidate, and his launch endorsements do show the typical starts of a more feasible campaign. The highlights of the launch endorsements are probably those from former HUD Secretary Barbara Lee, former congressman Dennis Kucinich, and from two sitting members of congress, Sam Farr and Donna Edwards. Farr, a Californian, represents the district that includes Pacific Grove and Monterey where Jealous and his parents grew up. Edwards, a Maryland congresswoman whose district now stretches from the DC suburbs in Prince George's County to parts of the Western Shore outside Annapolis, is also one of the several initial home state endorsements for the Marylander hopeful. Jealous's endorsements include Maryland delegates Jamie Raskin, Paul Pinsky, Tiffany Alston, Joan Conway, and Joanne Benson. However, two major potential Maryland endorsers are missing from Jealous's list; the mayors of Baltimore and Annapolis. With Baltimore mayor Sheila Dixon currently embroiled in an embezzlement trial and attempting to run for reelection despite her plummeting approval rating in the city, the endorsement of the Baltimore mayor may not be desired at the moment. Annapolis mayor Zina Pierre’s lack of endorsement, however, is more telling and looks like a case of Clinton loyalty. Pierre previously worked in the Bill Clinton administration as director of the SBA’s Welfare to Work initiative. She was speculated as a possible nominee for SBA Administrator after Hillary Clinton was elected president, but was passed over for Karen Mills. Pierre was elected mayor of Annapolis last year and has already endorsed Clinton for reelection. Jealous has also been endorsed by former Senator Carol Moseley Braun, who earlier this year came second in the runoff election for Chicago mayor to then lieutenant governor Pat Quinn.


[1] Issa took a similar stance on Occupy Wall Street in OTL: https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...c-encampment/2011/12/13/gIQAzC3csO_story.html
[2] San Francisco passed a similar resolution on OTL Occupy Wall Street, and Elsbernd was one of the votes against. http://sfappeal.com/2011/11/supes-approve-resolution-in-support-of-occupysf/
[3] The numbers might be inflated some from what I could find, but hey what's a little rounding up when you're trying to make the concerning thing sound more concerning.
[4] Angela Davis was at the Port of Oakland strike in November 2011 in OTL, and Lee expressed strong support for the Occupy camp.
[5] Quotes taken verbatim or only slightly modified from McGinn’s speech to the Occupy protest at Westlake Park in OTL.
[6] "We Are The 99%" first appeared in August 2011 on tumblr as a slogan for the preparation for the original Occupy Wall Street protest, so I wanted to have something different become the main Occupy slogan ITTL.
 
Also the Canada election map.

GgFs3r3.png
 
Love to see it! Unfortunately Prime Minisger Jack Layton won't be long for this world. He only has a few months though to really make a difference in Canadian policy and the NDP agenda!
Hmm, perhaps with this in mind, it would be very interesting to see how would the NDP leadership election ITTL would go with the fact that they are now in goverment.
 
Green-Endorsed Candidate Elected As Denver Mayor
June 8, 2011

DENVER, CO - Denver by now has a history of electing relative unknowns in its mayoral elections. In 1991 Wellington Webb ran, or rather walked, in what became known as his “Sneaker Campaign”, going door to door through a large part of the city. Despite his previous tenure as a state legislator, city auditor, and heading DORA, the Colorado Department of Regulatory Agencies, Webb was not considered a front runner in the primary and his reaching the primary and winning the runoff were both surprises then. In 2003, now governor John Hickenlooper was merely the owner of a downtown brewpub who had made a name for himself in the community fighting to keep the name Mile High attached to the Broncos football stadium. Hickenlooper won a commanding lead in both the primary and the runoff thanks in part to his perception as an outsider and from quirky campaign ads that helped build that image. Now, eight years later, Hickenlooper has moved across Civic Center Park from the city office to the state Capitol. In the race to succeed him, Denverites have again elected another relative unknown.

James Mejia, as he will eagerly tell you, comes from a family of educators. Both his parents were teachers, his father at West High School and his mother an early childhood educator. It seems fitting that the most recent position that Mejia held before running for mayor, then, was as CEO of the Denver Preschool Program. However, Mejia took a meandering path to get there. In a background that has more similarities to Webb than Hickenlooper, Mejia’s relative obscurity to Denverites has had more to do with where he had worked in politics than a lack of political experience. Mejia has worked extensively in administrative posts in Denver under both Webb and Hickenlooper. Under Webb, Mejia held a number of offices including deputy director of the Mayor’s Office of Economic Development and executive director of the Agency for Human Rights and Community Relations. Under Hickenlooper, Mejia was appointed for a time as a project manager at the Denver Justice Center. Mejia also has a small amount of prior experience in elective office, being elected to a four year term as an at-large member of the Denver Public School board from 1999 to 2003.

Mejia began his campaign for mayor early, announcing in mid-2010. Mejia was the first to formally enter the race, a move which as he said at the time was about not wanting to wait unnecessarily to see if Hickenlooper would win the governorship. It turned out to be a keen eye for anticipation from the unknown candidate, as it gave Mejia time to build up his war chest and name recognition while others hemmed and hawed or ran for other races while waiting to see if Hickenlooper would indeed leave the seat up for grabs. In February as interim mayor Bill Vidal announced he would not be running for a full term, others jumped in. The major contenders in the primary besides Mejia were city council members Michael Hancock and Carol Boigon and state senator Chris Romer, son of former governor Roy Romer. To the surprise of many, Mejia quickly became a contender with the more well known candidates, and soon was topping polls in a close three way race with Hancock and Romer all polling around 20 percent. Boigon dropped out of the primary in April and endorsed Hancock after her support fell to single digits. However, Mejia had a few key endorsements going into the primary. While Hancock had former mayor Webb, Mejia received the endorsement of Webb’s predecessor, Federico Peña. Mejia also had the support of a growing force in the city and state Green Party, though he is currently unaffiliated with any party[1]. After the Greens won their first mayoral victory in a large city outside of the west coast two months ago in Milwaukee, and with Mejia narrowly making the runoff against Hancock[2], the party’s support became an asset. Mejia also had key support from the Denver Classroom Teachers’ Association, Denver’s largest teachers union, in a race where education has been a spotlight issue.

While Mejia was taking an unorthodox path with the Green Party endorsement, in many ways his campaign followed in the footsteps of Denver’s previous mayors. Like Hickenlooper and Webb before him, Mejia has called on Denverites to continually imagine and strive for a better and better Denver. Mejia campaigned on making Denver a center for sustainability and the renewable energy industry, developing the Platte Valley and Sun Valley districts along the South Platte to improve the downtown housing situation, continuing the growth of Denver’s world class cultural and artistic institutions, and on an issue that hits close to home for Mejia, increasing funding and employment opportunities for the cities schools and education institutions. The runoff race continued to be close between Mejia and Hancock. While early polls after the first round favored Hancock, Mejia received a strong boost when he won Romer’s coveted endorsement. In last night’s voting, Mejia narrowly defeated Hancock 52-48 to become Denver’s next mayor. As he enters the mayorship, Mejia may be an outsider with big dreams, but looking at Denver’s recent past, the seasoned civil servant will be in good company in the mayor’s office to look back and learn from.

***

Cracking the Castro: Preliminary Redistricting Takes Aim at Green Support Base
June 10, 2011

SAN FRANCISCO - California’s first ever independent citizens’ redistricting commission today released the first draft of the new maps for the state’s congressional, legislative, and board of equalization districts. With the data from the 2010 census released in March, the mapmaking began in earnest in May. Before and during this process, the redistricting commission held nearly three dozen public hearings around the state and nearly 50,000 public comments on the process and what Californians would like to see out of the new maps. This is the first time the once in a decade process is under the control of an independent commission rather than the legislature. With the first maps released to the public, a new round of public hearings and input has begun. One of the most vocal complaints about the proposed maps has come from the Green Party of California over what the party claims are unfair changes to state legislative district map.

The first release draft of the new district maps for the state legislature include a state senate district that has been drawn to place the two Green state senators, Norm Solomon and Jerry McNerney, into the same district. In order to do so, the new 5th district stretches from Marin County where Solomon lives in Inverness east across the North Bay Area to McNerney’s residence of Stockton. Meanwhile, the state assembly map splits the city of San Francisco between four districts, all snaking out from the city in different directions. It is here that the attempt to reduce the influence of the Green Party is the clearest. The neighborhoods where the Green Party has established its greatest support base have been divided among the multiple districts. Most of the Mission neighborhood has been placed in a district that includes northeastern San Francisco including the financial district and Pacific Heights, but also parts of the East Bay including Alameda and San Leandro but avoiding Oakland, another lean Green city. The Castro neighborhood has also been split between that district and the southwest San Francisco district, which snakes south along the west side of the Santa Cruz Mountains to the outskirts of the city of Santa Cruz. The Bernal Heights neighborhood is put in the southeastern district, which continues south to San Mateo. Finally, Haight-Ashbury has been placed in the northwestern district, which includes much of eastern Marin County and Petaluma.

Derek Iversen, spokesperson for the Green Party of California, voiced the party’s concerns over the existing maps, calling the first draft “a clear effort by the major party politicians to choose their voters instead of voters choosing the politicians.” Iversen said it was a sad day for democracy that even an idealistic goal such as the citizens’ redistricting commission had been corrupted by partisan influence, and pointed to the shutting out of equal Green representation on the commission as a cause for the situation of the first draft maps. The Greens do have one member on the commission, but she is part of the “other or unaffiliated” members. Democrats and Republicans, meanwhile, each have five members on the fourteen member commission. The Green Party are not the only ones who have voiced concerns with the maps as they are currently drawn up either. Some San Franciscans also complained that the current maps’ division of their city between four districts violates the priority of the redistricting commission to preserve communities of interest. Communities of interest according to the redistricting guidelines are “a contiguous population which shares common social and economic interests that should be included within a single district for purposes of its effective and fair representation”[3] and may include not just cities and counties, but can also include more abstract communities such as transportation corridors, agricultural regions, areas with similar industries, or media markets. While the guidelines state that communities of interest cannot take into account relationships to political parties or candidates, some citizens have said that the map unnecessarily divides geographically and economically similar parts of San Francisco between multiple districts.

Members of the commission have welcomed public comment on the draft maps including the issues raised by the Green Party and have cautioned that these maps are only preliminary drafts and not final proposals. The next step will be another round of public hearings and a comment period on the maps will take place over the next two and a half months as the commission continues its work. The commission will continue to release a series of draft maps during this period. The deadline for the commission to vote and approve a final proposal for the district maps is August 15. Afterward, the maps must be approved by the state courts, which is when any legal challenges to the maps may take place. The commission estimates they will have a final proposal submitted for public comment by the end of July. For the commission to approve a final map, at least nine of the fourteen members must vote yes on the map, including three Democrats, three Republicans, and three Other members.

***

Governor Hassenfeld Signs Bill Legalizing Gay Marriage in Rhode Island
June 15, 2011

PROVIDENCE, RI - With the legislative session in Providence wrapping up in two weeks time, Rhode Island’s legislators have been busy paring down which bills they will be able to pass and send to governor Hassenfeld before the end of the session. Democrats are firmly in control of both chambers of the legislature, but a sticking point has been figuring out which bills will get through Moderate governor Alan Hassenfeld without a veto. One set of bills that has seen significant contention in the legislature this session has been two competing bills surrounding the issue of same-sex marriage. The bill that most have been pushing for would legalize gay marriage in Rhode Island. Another bill tabled by some gay marriage opponents as an alternative to outright legalization would give same-sex couples and siblings the right to become beneficiaries and make partners’ medical decisions, a version of the civil union bills that have sometimes been put forward as an alternative to marriage.

The prospect for legalizing same sex marriage in Rhode Island seemed to be good at first when the legislature began meeting in January. Governor Hassenfeld said he would sign a bill if it came to his desk. Assembly Speaker Nicholas Matiello expressed support for the bill, despite his noted conservative stances on other issues. The bill hit a snag in the months following its introduction as debate dragged on and senate president Teresa Paiva Weed, a Democrat who opposes same sex marriage, did not confirm whether she would bring the bill to a floor vote in the senate if it passed in the house. Questions also arose of whether the simple legalization bill would pass votes in the state judiciary committees. In April, as the bill continued to stall, the competing civil union bill was introduced as a possible compromise if the marriage bill failed to advance.

After fears from proponents that it would be killed for the session, the marriage bill finally picked up speed in the legislature again in May. House Judiciary committee chairwoman Edith Ajello expressed confidence in May that it would pass the legislature, and after fruitful negotiations with senate president Paiva Weed, the bill began advancing through the legislature. It passed the Senate on May 27, and was sent to governor Hassenfeld’s desk. Governor Hassenfeld signed the bill into law this morning in a press conference that included former legislator Mike Piasturo and congressman David Cicciline. Hassenfeld’s speech announcing the signing of the bill included a rare emotional moment for the governor, talking about his brother Stephen Hassenfeld. Stephen served as CEO of Hasbro until he died of AIDS in 1989 at the age of 47. Alan took over management of Hasbro after Stephen’s death. The governor talked about how Stephen was very private even to close family about being gay and about his diagnosis, how the perception of a gay man running a children’s toy company forced Stephen to keep his identity a close secret, and how even his brother didn’t know Stephen had AIDS until his death[4]. Governor Hassenfeld expressed how proud he was to sign the bill in honor of Stephen.

With Hassenfeld’s signature, Rhode Island has now become the tenth state in the country to legalize gay marriage. It is the last state in New England to do so after a challenge to Maine’s law two years ago narrowly failed. The other states that have legalized gay marriage are California, Colorado, Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Vermont, as well as Washington D.C.[5] After Maryland legalized gay marriage in April and now Rhode Island, New York appears likely to be the next state to do so as a bill seems on course to pass that legislature this week and go to governor Andrew Cuomo’s desk this month or in July.


***

Another Actor As Governor? Two Hollywood Georges Vie For Position
June 27, 2011

LOS ANGELES - After having the Terminator as governor, California might be about to elect Batman or Sulu. The recall election against governor Darrell Issa gathered enough signatures last week to go to a ballot, and now a flurry of candidates have rushed to join the race to possibly replace Issa. Among them are two Hollywood celebrities who have thrown their hats into the ring, George Clooney and George Takei. Clooney has apparently found himself with some free time this year after finally grabbing an Oscar for his starring Sinatra-inspired role in the Martin Scorsese film Bobbysoxer[6]. In April, Clooney traveled on a humanitarian trip to Chad, Darfur, and Sudan to highlight the progress and challenges facing the three countries in the aftermath of the African Spring and to bring attention to power sharing struggles in Darfur in its first months of independence. Takei has been outspoken on a number of political issues, most recently on gay marriage. Takei is gay and married his partner in 2008 after California legalized same sex marriage. Takei has also previously spoken about running for office and unlike Clooney or Schwarzenegger, Takei already has some political and campaign experience under his belt. The Star Trek actor ran for Los Angeles city council in 1973 and briefly ran for California state assembly in 1980 before withdrawing from that race. Takei has also served on the Southern California Rapid Transit District, where he was once pulled away from the set of Star Trek: The Motion Picture to cast the tie-breaking vote for the creation of the Metro Rail transit system in Los Angeles.

Clooney and Takei are just two of the candidates who have filed to run for governor in the recall election against governor Issa. The recall petition, first filed just weeks after Issa entered office in January this year, reached the over 1.2 million signatures necessary to trigger a vote on the ballot last week on June 21. Governor Issa has set the recall date for Tuesday August 23, the earliest Tuesday within the 60 to 80 day window following the certification of the signatures by the Secretary of State. Already less than two weeks into the recall campaign’s official beginning, the number of candidates seeking to replace Issa if he is recalled has ballooned, giving many Californians further flashbacks to the 2003 recall of Gray Davis. Just as Arnold Schwarzenegger sought the office eight years ago, Clooney and Takei also seem to think they have what it takes to move from Hollywood to Sacramento. Also just like Schwarzenegger, many Californians seem to agree with both Takei and Clooney. While the early polling of a potential recall has been very divided, Clooney has polled as high as second place with 18%, while Takei has polled as high as fourth at 12%. Both are running as Democrats.

Other candidates in the recall election include a number of both politicians and business owners. Former assembly Speaker and lieutenant gubernatorial candidate Karen Bass has emerged as the strongest Democratic politician to enter the race. LAUSD Superintendent and former Colorado governor Roy Romer and Berkeley mayor Tom Bates have also joined the race. While Bass is polling the best of any Democrat in initial polls, support for her from the party has so far been hesitant, with some party insiders speaking on condition of anonymity raising concerns about fundraising and speculating that Clooney or Romer may be a better candidate for Democrats to rally around. Lieutenant governor Dave Cogdill, much like Cruz Bustamante in the Davis recall, announced he would be running last week after an initial poll showed Issa losing the recall question 45-55. In an event that throws somewhat of a wrench into the Republican efforts to retain the governorship in the case that Issa is recalled, after Cogdill announced, fellow Republican state assemblyman Tim Donnelly also declared his candidacy on Friday. Donnelly, a Tea Party conservative, lambasted Cogdill’s role in the 2009 budget negotiations that saw seven Republicans in the state legislature align with Democrats to pass a bill to try and close California’s budget gap. For the Green Party, a recall of governor Issa might seem like a golden opportunity for San Francisco mayor Matt Gonzalez to try to ascend to higher office, but Gonzalez did not file to run by the deadline on Saturday. However, there will be at least one Green candidate in the recall. Mendocino County supervisor Dan Hamburg announced on Friday that he was entering the race and filed his declaration of candidacy shortly before the deadline on Saturday. Hamburg previously served in Congress as a Democrat representing the north coast for one term from 1993 to 1995.

As in 2003, the main candidates have been joined by a number of less serious candidates in an attempt to gain publicity or perhaps jump to notoriety and support in the same way that many political onlookers have come to perceive Schwarzenegger's rise to the governorship. The most prominent of these is likely Reed Hastings, the founder and CEO of movie rental company Netflix. Hastings, a Democrat, recently presided over the successful transition of Netflix from primarily a DVD rental service to online streaming, signing lucrative deals with a number of companies, such as a recent expansion of its deal with Fox to offer back catalogs of some of its recent hit shows such as Glee, 24, and Sons of Anarchy. Netflix’s growth into the online subscription market has been so successful, Hastings said in May, that Netflix now uses more bandwidth in the United States than web download site BitTorrent. In fact Netflix has been so successful that some including Hastings speculate that for the first time ever, most content accessed on the internet is now paid for instead of being free or pirated[7]. The entries of Hastings, Clooney and Takei as well as more traditional politicians like Bass, Cogdill, and Donnelly will at least ensure that California voters have plenty of options to choose from if they decide to reject and replace governor Issa in two months.



[1] In OTL I'm pretty sure Mejia is a Democrat, but here he switches to unaffiliated before running for mayor. While Denver's mayoral race is nonpartisan, Mejia does it to help build his relative outsider image.
[2] In OTL Mejia missed out on the top two for the runoff by exactly 1,000 votes to Romer. Romer would lose to Hancock in the runoff.
[3] Quote from the Redistricting Commission’s legal handbook.
[4] Some important clarification for this part. It is known that Stephen Hassenfeld died of AIDS in 1989, but I could only find one source claiming to confirm that he was gay, the book Toy Wars: The Epic Struggle Between G.I. Joe, Barbie, and the Companies that Make Them on Hasbro and Mattel, and other sources I found trace back to that book. For narrative purposes here I am including it, but I want to note that it is something that isn’t completely confirmed.
[5] By this point in OTL, only DC and five states, Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont, had legalized same sex marriage. California and Maine had previously legalized it but were overturned in ballot measures.
[6] Bobbysoxer is based on Scorsese's attempt in the 2000s to get a Sinatra biopic going, which ended up not happening because talks with the estate fell through (supposedly because of disagreements over portraying Sinatra's mob connections). Here Scorsese goes with a fictionalized version, casting Clooney as the starring role. The film's title is a reference to how "bobby-soxer" was originally a term for Sinatra's teen girl fans in the 40s.
[7] Source: http://www.cnn.com/2011/TECH/web/05/18/netflix.piracy.wired/index.html
 
Here are the proposed districts that were mentioned in the redistricting section. I used Dave's Redistricting Atlas to make these and will be doing so for the final maps as well so look forward to that.

First, the state senate district to stick Solomon and McNerney in the same district.
RY1PFGH.png


And next, the districts dividing San Francisco. I also added a bit more in the map to split the Green-friendly parts of the East Bay between two districts.
lHN0LSC.png
NaXzdy4.png
 
Another wonderful update as always.
Is there any worry amongst California voters that Recall-Elections will become partisan tools going forwards?
 
Democrats Are Making Themselves the Party of White Women Only
June 30, 2011

SACRAMENTO, CA - Since the 2008 presidential campaign, the Democratic Party organization has made one of its big messages to voters how good the party is for women. President Hillary Clinton is the first woman elected president. The Democrats have had women in House leadership since 2003 with Speakers Nancy Pelosi and Diana DeGette. The chair of the Democratic National Committee is now former Washington senator Patty Murray. The Clinton administration during the election committed to a Cabinet made up equally of men and women, and Clinton has kept that promise even through changes made to the Cabinet earlier this year. But for all the talk of Democrats around being the party of women and lifting women up, the party has fallen short for minorities, especially for black women.

For starters, when the Clinton administration was appointing its gender parity cabinet, out of the fourteen positions given to women, Clinton only nominated one black woman: Barbara Lee as Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. Lee was a valuable cabinet member at HUD, doing her best to keep the Clinton administration focused on helping the poorest and most vulnerable citizens of the country recover from the Great Recession and lift them out of poverty. Clinton and Democrats however were not pleased about this. Their corporate backers wanted nothing more than a compliant government with no real change to policy. Even healthcare reform, Clinton’s supposed landmark policy achievement, faced backlash from fellow Democrats beholden to the the insurance industry when Lee tried to do her job at HUD to smooth the transition toward the public option and help it reach more marginalized minority populations. For trying to do her job and protect every American's access to healthcare, Clinton removed Lee from her position as HUD Secretary and replaced her with a man.

But Lee is far from alone on this, and the Democratic complacency and refusal to lift black women up to power runs much deeper than in the federal government. In Chicago earlier this year, two Democrats made it past the first primary to the runoff. One, lieutenant governor Pat Quinn, is a white man. The other, former Senator Carol Moseley Braun, is a black woman. Guess which candidate the majority of the Democratic establishment backed, including Senator Barack Obama? That’s right, Quinn, and he was elected mayor over Moseley Braun in the runoff. In Alabama, Terri Sewell ran to be the first black female nominee for governor in Alabama in 2010, but Democrats backed Ron Sparks over her. And now, in California, Democrats are making the same mistake they made last year. Karen Bass ably led the state house during the budget negotiations in 2009, and in 2010 she ran for the Democratic nomination for governor of California. Democrats eschewed her for Jerry Brown and Dianne Feinstein. Bass was forced to settle for the lieutenant governor race, and Feinstein ended up costing Democrats both the governor and lieutenant governor races. Now that governor Issa is being recalled and Bass is running again in the recall, Democrats have a rare chance to rectify their mistake so soon after making it. Again though, the Democratic establishment is refusing to back a black woman for office, instead going with a completely untested candidate and yet another Hollywood actor in George Clooney. Bass would be a much better candidate and has the experience and a proven political record than Clooney, but so far the money is flowing to Clooney instead. Democrats risk making the same mistake twice in less than a year, but they’re just too afraid to be supportive of a community that has shown up for them and too afraid to show up for even experienced black women with proven records of success.

So if Democrats aren’t the answer to supporting black women, then who is? There has to be some party that women of color can turn to when the Democrats who used to be the party of Shirley Chisholm, Barbara Jordan, and Patsy Mink go back on their rhetoric and fail to support us. Luckily, the Green Party has increasingly done so in big ways. They are not afraid to run women of color. The Green Party has nominated two women of color, Winona LaDuke and Cynthia McKinney, for vice president when neither major party has done so. They’ve put forward women like Angela Davis for the California state assembly and Angela Walker for mayor of Milwaukee and won. They’ve nominated women like Barbara Becnel for governor of California, Elaine Brown for senate in Georgia, and Colia Clark for senate in New York[1]. Even Republicans have been better at putting forward black women than Democrats are now. The country finally has its first black female governor, and she’s not a Democrat. Jennette Bradley, governor of Ohio, is a Republican. The GOP also had two more minority women running for governor, Susana Martinez in New Mexico and Nikki Haley in South Carolina. On top of that, the Bush administration also had Condoleezza Rice as Secretary of State, one of the most important Cabinet positions, while Clinton was content to give Lee just HUD Secretary. So even the GOP is more willing to give them a chance. It’s clear that the Republicans and especially the Green Party are much more willing to try to lift up women of color into the highest offices of the nation instead of leaving them behind like the Democrats do[2].

***

Green Party Formally Announces Intention to Participate in ‘First in the Nation’ Primary
July 1, 2011

MANCHESTER, NH - As a show of their continued emerging presence in state and national politics, the Green Party announced today that they have reached another significant milestone on the road to relevance. While Democrats are focusing on Hillary Clinton’s reelection campaign, and Republicans are starting the invisible primary in earnest, the Greens are still sorting out where they can be on the ballot and what the party’s primary season will look like. As part of the Greens’ and other third parties’ attempts to play with the big parties, they will sometimes try to qualify to hold presidential primaries. The Green Party has made some strides in this regard, and this may be their biggest one yet. Green Party national spokesperson Holly Hart announced today the party’s intention to participate in New Hampshire's first in the nation presidential primary next year.

Different states have different qualifications to allow a party to hold a presidential primary in that state, usually in relation to the qualification for official political party status. In New Hampshire, for a political organization to become a recognized political party and therefore be eligible to hold an official state primary to nominate a presidential candidate, the party must have received at least four percent in the previous general election for either governor or senator. In 2010, Green candidate for governor Jane Difley[3] received 4.2% of the vote in New Hampshire’s gubernatorial election, which qualified the Greens for official party status in the state and made them eligible to participate in the first in the nation primary.

While the national Green Party statements have been congratulatory about the party’s qualification for official party status in New Hampshire, holding a presidential primary in the state does create a potential shift in how the Greens’ presidential nomination process might work and a potential candidate’s path to the nomination. By participating in the New Hampshire primary, any other state primary now must be pushed back in the order. According to New Hampshire state law, the date of the presidential primary must be at least one week before any other presidential primary held in another state. While this does not affect all states as not every state Green Party holds a presidential primary, any state Green Party that was hoping to hold an early primary in January will now have to wait until seven days after New Hampshire's. When that is exactly is still unknown, as New Hampshire itself still has not set a date for its primary. However, given past Green presidential primaries have typically started in February, this will likely not be an issue the Greens will run into, unlike the Democrats and Republican parties which frequently jockey for position for earlier primaries to bring more candidate attention on their state. For the Greens, the New Hampshire primary might alter the campaign by putting more of that national attention on the Greens in general. One effect it could have on any candidates given the likely much smaller number of voters in the Green primaries is to tilt attention toward candidates from New England. Potential candidates for the Green nomination for president right now include Maine state senator John Eder and former Massachusetts state assemblywoman Jill Stein, both of whom could benefit from a greater media focus on nearby New Hampshire.

Another interesting quirk about the New Hampshire primary is that this is not actually the first time a third party has qualified to be part of the first in the nation primary alongside Democrats and Republicans. In both 1992 and 1996, the Libertarian Party qualified for the primary after receiving over four percent of the vote in the 1990 and 1994 gubernatorial elections. In 1992, the Libertarian primary was uncontested with all 3,219 Libertarian primary votes going to Andre Marrou. At the time, Marrou also received 99 write-in votes in the Republican primary and 67 write-in votes in the Democratic primary. Notably that year, Marrou also received the most votes out of any presidential candidate - 10 votes - in the small town of Dixville Notch, which typically counts their votes at midnight on primary day and has garnered notoriety for reporting the first results of any presidential primary[4]. In 1996, the Libertarian primary was actually contested. Harry Browne, who would become that year’s nominee, received 653 votes, tax protester Irwin Schiff received 336 votes, and the remaining votes were split between a number of other write-in candidates.

***

Occupy Protests Fade With Summer, But Pipeline Protests Are Heating Up
July 28, 2011

HELENA, MT - When the Occupy Movement protests began in March, nobody knew how long they would last. Even the organizers and most eager protesters themselves felt at first the initial protest would only last a week or two. Instead, what began as marches and protest camps in San Francisco and Oakland spread across the country and even to a few protests in Canada and Europe. The wave of protests brought with it comparisons to the African Spring with its now two years of demonstrations and uprisings that have toppled multiple governments across the continent. The talk of the Occupy Movement being a sort of American Spring, however, has turned out to be much more hype than substance with only a few political successes such as Milwaukee to point to.

By June, the Occupy protests were already on the wane. As the original California protests were sparked by not just concerns over Wall Street but over the effect the financial collapse had on higher education and the rise in tuition at California’s universities, many participants in the Occupy Movement were college students or other young people. With school ending for the summer and hot weather hitting much of the country, the drive to continue the Occupy camps in many cities slowed and stopped as students returned home for the summer and the summer heat drove young urbanites indoors. However, as the Occupy protests have largely receded in the cities, the American heartland is seeing a new wave of protests in many Great Plains states over the continued uncertain fate of the Keystone XL oil pipeline expansion. The proposed TransCanada pipeline connecting Alberta's tar sands to refineries in Oklahoma and Texas has been pending approval by the State Department for over a year now as environmentalist concerns over the effect of the pipeline construction and potential spills combined with protests have led to the Clinton administration delaying the project’s approval. The Clinton administration has been reluctant to cancel the project altogether as energy analysts and some Democratic politicians including Montana governor Brian Schweitzer push for the pipeline to go ahead.

Most recently, the State Department in June announced a further delay in the process of approving the pipeline after the EPA released a report which found a number of potential detrimental environmental impacts of the planned route. The delay is not enough for the protesters though. Spokespeople for environmental and indigenous advocacy organizations who were present at the protests this month said they have been voicing concerns similar to the EPA report for years since the Keystone pipeline proposal. For these groups, delay and continued review is no longer a viable solution. Bill McKibben, the organizer of a protest outside the White House this week and one of several protests that have occurred outside federal and state offices over the past month, said the only solution now is for the State Department to fully cancel any approval and pending future approval of the pipeline. That sentiment has been echoed in protests across the Plains states. A protest in Pierre organized by Native American activist Debra White Plume drew hundreds of protesters to the South Dakota's sleepy capital city. While the protests have mainly been concentrated around South Dakota and Nebraska, this summer Montana has emerged as another site of growing demonstrations against the Keystone pipeline. Aside from a brief flurry of demonstrations in solidarity with the coastal Occupy movements at the end of April in Missoula and Bozeman that lasted only a few days, Montana hadn’t seen much in the way of activity in either Occupy or in the pipeline protests last year. Over the past two weeks though, nearly five hundred protesters have shown up at demonstrations against the pipeline in both Bozeman and Helena, with protesters coming from across the state, and from as far away as Minneapolis and Seattle. Governor Schweitzer’s recent statement calling on the Clinton administration to approve the pipeline “to promote American energy independence” has turned some green activists in the state against the popular Democratic governor. Bill Yellowtail, a rancher and former state legislator who is a member of the Crow Indian Reservation, told reporters in an interview that he has been watching the oil and gas industry eat up the native-owned property around his ranch. He argued that contrary to what oil lobbyists argue, the pipeline would accelerate the hollowing out of Native communities in Montana. Yellowtail spoke from his office in Bozeman. He gave his support for the protests and called upon Schweitzer to back down on the pipeline issue, but Yellowtail said he has not personally attended the protests.

One peculiar aspect of the Montana protests recently and some of the other pipeline protests in the Plains states is a case of strange bedfellows with Tea Partiers joining in alongside the environmental and Native American groups in fighting against the approval of the Keystone pipeline[5]. The Tea Party political motivation for opposing the Keystone pipeline may be somewhat different than the others involved. The idea of a Canadian company building an oil pipeline across American soil, the perception that it is being pushed through the federal government with little oversight or concern for local communities, and maybe a little knee-jerk opposition to a Democratic project supported by people like Clinton and Schweitzer, are all causing some self-described members of the conservative Tea Party movement to join with more liberal activists to protest the Keystone project. The distrust of international corporations is the biggest unifying factor in the Green and Tea Party movements, but there is also a focus on rural issues. With many conservatives in the Plains states working in farming or using rural areas for hunting and fishing, and at least some of the conservative American ideal being about individual self-sufficiency, the importance of conserving and protecting natural areas and water resources can stretch across the political spectrum. Senator Scott Kleeb of Nebraska, who has been one of the foremost Democrats opposing the Keystone pipeline, told reporters he has received hundreds of messages from people in Nebraska and in surrounding states who say they are conservatives or Tea Party members but support him for opposing the pipeline. The number of conservatives who want the government to end consideration of the Keystone pipeline is still likely fairly low as the activist and protest circles still lean heavily left. However, this does show that there are in fact some issues where the interests of the left and right can overlap and where groups as widely polarized as the Greens and Tea Party may find some common ground.

***

Maine State Senator John Eder is First Candidate to Announce for Greens
August 4, 2011

PORTLAND, ME - With just six months left until the Green presidential primary kicks off, the field of candidates have been quiet about their intentions to run. While this typically is normal for third parties, the recent increased public and media attention toward the Green Party makes it seem comparatively slow to start when one comes from the year long invisible primary in either the Democratic or Republican presidential primary contests. That curious quietude has finally come to an end now. John Eder, a Maine state senator from Portland, announced on Tuesday that he will run for the 2012 Green nomination for the presidency.

Eder is the first Green candidate to enter the race for the nomination. He has been one of the trailblazers in Green politics as the first Green Party politician to be elected to a state legislature for a full term. That was in 2002, when Eder was first elected to a Portland seat in the Maine state house. Since then, he has served six years in the state house before being elected to the state senate in 2008 and serving so far three years in the state senate. Eder’s most notable feat, however, has not been in the state legislature but rather at the statewide level. In 2010, Eder was the Green nominee for governor of Maine. During that race, Eder came in third out of five major candidates, losing to independent Eliot Cutler who won the race and to Republican candidate Paul LePage. Remarkably though, Eder finished ahead of the Democratic candidate, senate president Libby Mitchell, and won over 13% of the statewide vote. Eder hopes to take that success in a state race and the longevity of his state legislative career to the national stage as proofs of his experience and electability in his run for the Green presidential nomination.

While Eder is the first candidate to jump into the race, he is not expected to be alone. Dissatisfaction with Hillary Clinton’s presidency among some more progressive Democrats could be a big boost in the polls to whichever candidate wins the Green nomination, and the Green primary field is expected to grow as we move closer to the beginning New Hampshire contest early next year. A few candidates are widely speculated to join Eder in the race. San Francisco mayor Matt Gonzalez, who has passed up multiple opportunities to run for higher office and has opted not to run for reelection as mayor this year, has been considered a likely potential candidate for months now. Gonzalez could also be thinking about a run for congress or a state legislature seat, but he is perhaps the most high profile potential candidate right now. Seattle mayor Mike McGinn, former Massachusetts state assemblywoman Jill Stein, and former United States Senate candidate Tom Clements of South Carolina are also thought to be considering runs for the presidential nomination. With the New Hampshire primary being held on effectively the same stage as Democrats and Republicans, the primary is liable to give a major boost in media exposure to whoever wins. Eder's decision to jump in now puts the immediate focus on him for New Hampshire with Eder coming from a neighboring state. If Stein runs, they are the most likely to benefit from a home region advantage in New Hampshire. However, such thinking comes from examining more traditional party primaries. The difference in the scale of number of voters and the nature of third parties as a whole, analysts should take caution about thinking along the same lines as one would a traditional major party primary when it comes to predicting the course of a Green Party primary.



[1] Colia Clark was the Green nominee for Senate in the 2010 regular election against Chuck Schumer.
[2] The in-universe author of this is ignoring other Democrats such as Labor Secretary Hilda Solis and Florida governor Alex Sink.
[3] Difley was president of the New Hampshire Forest Society.
[4] Marrou's 1992 result is of course historical. He got 10 votes to Bush Sr.'s 9. In the general election, Marrou also got 5 votes in Dixville Notch pushing Clinton to 4th in the town (Perot came 2nd).
[5] https://ourworld.unu.edu/en/will-keystone-xl-pipeline-make-conservationists-of-conservatives
 
Canadian Prime Minister Jack Layton, Aged 61, Dies
August 8, 2011

OTTAWA, CANADA - Jack Layton, the Prime Minister of Canada and the first member of the New Democratic Party to hold the office, died Monday at the age of 61. Layton passed away last night in the Prime Minister’s residence. He had previously announced he was diagnosed with prostate cancer in February 2010. He had received treatment and was in remission, but according to a statement by the Prime Minister’s office last month his cancer had returned. Layton passed away peacefully in his sleep last night. He is survived by his wife Olivia Chow and three children from a previous marriage.

Layton’s death comes just three months after his election as Prime Minister of Canada. As the leader of the New Democratic Party, Layton’s election as the first Prime Minister from the left-wing party sent shockwaves throughout Canadian politics. After stepping up to the leadership of the party in 2003, Layton worked tirelessly to build up the New Democrats over the past eight years, bringing them from the fourth largest party in Canada to a majority in parliament after the election of May this year. Layton’s successful campaign, coming on the heels of the Occupy movement, promised that the NDP would balance the budget within four years through raising corporate taxes and cracking down on corporate and wealthy tax avoidance, promised to “do the Green Shift properly” by drastically cutting subsidies for oil companies and giving Canadians the tax cut that Dion promised, and pushing for democratic reform such as electoral reform and abolishing the Senate. Layton’s last public appearance was last week on August 3rd for a celebration of the 50th anniversary of the founding of the New Democratic Party.

Layton’s leadership of the NDP, his brief time as Prime Minister, and his life outside politics were characterized by a trademark optimism according to those who worked with him and knew him personally. The Prime Minister's career as an activist and organizer began early, starting in his teens when he attempted to build a youth center in his hometown of Hudson, Quebec. While the effort ultimately failed, it was an early indicator of Layton’s nature as a fighter and a man who would put himself out there for causes he felt were just. Layton's early efforts as a community organizer and activist in Toronto led him to become involved in a number of issues including the AIDS epidemic, environmentalism, public transit, poverty, and homelessness. It was also in Toronto where Layton first entered politics, being elected to Toronto’s city council in 1982. After running unsuccessfully for mayor of Toronto in 1991 and later for the House of Commons twice in that decade, Layton finally broke into national politics in the early 2000s. He was elected leader of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities in 2000 and then leader of the New Democrats in 2003. Once leader of the NDP, Layton finally was successful in running for parliament in the 2004 federal election when he was first elected in the Toronto-Danforth riding.

Layton’s death is a tragic day for Canada. It is the first time in Canadian history that a Prime Minister has died while in office. Canada does not have a direct line of succession in the case of death of a Prime Minister, and instead the party in government chooses an interim leader until a permanent party leadership election is held. The New Democratic Party made a statement this morning that Olivia Chow, Layton’s wife and MP for Trinity-Spadina, will serve as interim leader of the party and acting Prime Minister until the NDP holds a leadership election[1]. Chow has already stated she will not be running for permanent leadership of the NDP, but she will serve as acting Prime Minister “with pride and dignity, and we will continue what Jack, our family, and this party’s supporters across Canada have strived to build.” The decision of Chow as interim party leader is somewhat unusual, though the two have worked closely together throughout their political careers. Layton and Chow were married in 1988, and Chow later joined Layton on the Toronto city council. NDP officials said in a press release that they are confident in the choice of Chow to serve until the leadership election. President Hillary Clinton, British Prime Minister David Cameron, and French president Nicolas Sarkozy have already expressed their condolences to Chow privately. Further private and public statements from other world leaders continue to come in as the day progresses. A state funeral for Prime Minister Layton is expected to be held in the coming days.

***

Whither Lieberman?
August 12, 2011

HARTFORD, CT - For the past couple of years, there has been one question which has loomed large over the Connecticut political arena. The question is if Senator Joe Lieberman would run for reelection in the Senate, and if so, what party if any would he run on and how would he go about it. The four-term Senator has been in a tough political spot for much of the last five years. In 2006, he lost the Democratic primary, but created the Connecticut For Lieberman Party to continue running that year. On the Connecticut For Lieberman ticket, Senator Lieberman won reelection to his fourth term defeating Democratic nominee Ned Lamont and Republican nominee Alan Schlesinger. Since then, Lieberman has been one of three independents currently in the Senate alongside fellow New England Senators Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island and Bernie Sanders of Vermont. Chafee, who faced a similar situation to Lieberman in 2006 when he was defeated in the Republican primary but ran and won as an independent that November, has already committed to running again as an independent next year. However, that question is still unanswered for Lieberman, and with it already being August the options are starting to thin.

The most straightforward option would be for Lieberman to run with the Connecticut For Lieberman Party. He did after all found the party with the sole purpose of getting himself elected. Unfortunately perhaps for Lieberman, he has not taken much interest in maintaining the party, and over the past six years he has lost control over the party organization. Shortly after Lieberman’s reelection in 2006 on the party label, Connecticut For Lieberman was taken over by a group of anti-Lieberman activists who have since kept control of the party’s organization and committees. Party chairman John Mertens has made it clear the party’s goal is now to embarrass the Senator by seeing Lieberman lose the Connecticut For Lieberman nomination and running a candidate against Lieberman in the 2012 Senate race. Mertens and the party made that goal possible last year when Mertens ran as the party’s candidate for Senate in the race won by Linda McMahon. Mertens’ vote total in the race was slightly over the 1% threshold needed to secure automatic ballot qualification for next year’s Senate race. Mertens says Lieberman is welcome to run for the CFL nomination but not to expect a victory[2].

With the CFL nomination likely out of consideration, the major party possibilities do present more hope for the Senator but still would be difficult roads to go down. Lieberman could attempt to return to the Democrats and run for the Democratic nomination, but he already lost the Democratic primary once in 2006 and after the stunt of running on his own party, it seems unlikely that the Connecticut Democrats will want to let him back into the party fold so easily. Ironically, the Republican Party may be the more likely of the two major parties to throw the doors open for Lieberman to run with them. Throughout his political career, Lieberman has presented himself as a moderate to conservative politician. It helped him first get elected to the Senate in 1988 and defeat liberal Republican Lowell Weicker, a race where Lieberman received the support of archconservatives William and James Buckley. While Lieberman has continued to caucus with the Democratic Party in the Senate since becoming an independent, he has broken with the party line on a number of occasions. This came to a head most notably in the vote on the American Access to Health Insurance Act, where Lieberman voted no on both the both the bill itself and the cloture vote. Lieberman’s no vote on cloture nearly cost President Clinton the 60 vote threshold needed to avoid a filibuster of her landmark legislation, leaving the key vote in the hands of moderate Maine Republican Olympia Snowe. Lieberman’s reputation could make him more of a fit now in the Republican Party. But the question remains of whether Republicans would accept him into their ranks. Party switches are always a gamble, especially with it being so nakedly done to secure a renomination and reelection. Arlen Specter tried a similar tack in Pennsylvania in 2009 when he jumped from the GOP to the Democrats. Specter lost the Democratic primary the next year to now Senator Joe Sestak. So while it could be one path for Lieberman to pursue, it would still be a great risk when he’s been viewed as a Democrat for so long.

Outside of these, the paths that remain for Lieberman would be running as an independent, running with a new party, or not running at all and retiring. Whether Lieberman plans to run at all is certainly the first question that needs to be answered. So far the Senator has stayed stubbornly silent on if he will run again, so all we are left with is speculation on what he might do if he does run and if running at all is in the best interest of Lieberman or the state of Connecticut. Lieberman running as an independent or with a new party would throw a big wrench into the electoral calculations for the Connecticut Senate race, and if Lieberman runs then his wrench would almost certainly be joined by another giant wrench: that of Ralph Nader. Since Lieberman jumped ship from the Democrats in 2006, Nader has taunted the Senator saying he could have beaten Lieberman that year. Last year, Nader put that theory to a partial test and ran for Senate. Against Senator Chris Dodd and eventual winner Linda McMahon, Nader preformed the best of any Green candidate for Senate, gaining nearly 20% of the vote. Shortly after the election, Nader indicated he was looking forward to challenging Lieberman for Senate in 2012, so if Lieberman opts to run Nader will no doubt join him. If Lieberman does go the independent route, that could create a potentially competitive four way race between Lieberman, Nader, and whoever the Democrats and Republicans nominate. So far, the polls indicate that a Nader entry may actually help Lieberman the most. Four-way polls from March had Lieberman winning against Nader and a generic Democrat and Republican with just 28% of the vote, and his approval ratings have held firm in the mid-30s since then. Curiously, Lieberman’s approvals have actually improved among Republicans. In a poll earlier this month, Lieberman received majority approval from Republicans while being underwater by double digits with Democrats. Lieberman’s bump among the GOP is likely due to his calls to get Congress to commit to debt reduction and his work across the aisle on a series of bipartisan proposals to cut the deficit. If it will be enough for Lieberman to commit to a run, let alone win, is still uncertain. Another wrinkle is that Lieberman does not necessarily have to commit to one option for his candidacy. Connecticut is one of the few states like New York that has fusion ballots, so Lieberman could run for the nomination of more than one party. Connecticut, like New York, allows a candidate to not just seek the nomination of multiple parties but also accept the cross-endorsement of a party even if they have not actively sought the nomination. There have been talks in New York and Rhode Island, among Michael Bloomberg’s Liberals and the upstart Moderate Party respectively, of starting parties and field candidates in other states, and Lieberman making either his top line would give them an immediate boost in a general election race. So Lieberman does have his options open if he decides to run. As for what he will do, only time, and Lieberman, will tell.

***

The Recaller Is Now the Recallee: Governor Darrell Issa Ousted by Californians in Recall Vote
August 23, 2011

SACRAMENTO, CA - Darrell Issa has had a tumultuous run as governor of California to say the least. Even before his inauguration, opponents of the governor started work on their effort to recall him and officially launched that petition just two weeks after Issa began serving the state as its governor. Now, the recall effort has run its full course. The results are now in for the recall election that went in front of voters this week. Less than ten months after Darrell Issa won election as governor, California voters have chosen to remove him from office.

Initially, the recall attempt against Issa appeared iffy. A recall so early in a governor's term has rarely been successful at even gathering enough signatures to force a ballot referendum. Because of this, more senior Democrats elected to stay out of the fray of a potential recall, either due to respect for the office or out of fear of jumping onto an already doomed cause. Both prominent 2010 candidates, Senator Dianne Feinstein and former governor Jerry Brown, declined to participate even after enough signatures had been gathered for it to go to the ballot. So did every member of congress, even the ones who helped back the recall effort as it gained strength. As a result, the Democratic lineup was full of newcomers or lesser known politicians. The most experienced were Karen Bass, who ran for governor then for lieutenant governor last year and lost against lieutenant governor Dave Coghill, and former LAUSD superintendent Roy Romer. Romer has gubernatorial experience, having served as governor of Colorado from 1987 to 1999.

As Issa's approval ratings and his chances in the recall election steadily fell, the race also featured a number of other inexperienced candidates. Hollywood actors George Clooney and George Takei both had credentials in varied non-elective political roles. The entry of multiple movie stars in to the race led to a media circus of another Schwarzenegger phenomenon and gave the pair of Clooney and Takei the nickname "the two Georges" among the media. However, a second Schwarzenegger failed to appear. While Clooney performed well in the polls, the recent Oscar winning actor dropped out of the race in July, saying that it was not the right time for him to make the jump to a political career. Takei occasionally polled in the double digits but never gained enough traction to really challenge for the lead. Clooney's exit from the race led to Democrats largely rallying behind Karen Bass as the party's candidate of choice and gave the Democrat enough support on election day to secure a comfortable victory. Nearly 55% of voters chose to recall governor Darrell Issa, and nearly one third of voters opted for Bass as Issa's replacement. With Bass's election, California now has its first black and first female governor.

One of the greatest surprises in the recall results was the second place finisher. With Clooney dropping out, a unified Democratic support coalesced around Bass, but Republicans still had both Cogdill and Donnelly in the race. Since both Republicans had been polling near the front while Clooney was in, neither candidate dropped out. Donnelly gained a boost from more right wing Tea Party voters who were still upset about Cogdill’s role in the Sacramento Seven, while exit polls show that Cogdill did well with some independents who felt that Bass was still too far to the left. The continued presence of both Republicans up to election day resulted in a near even split of the approximately one third of the vote that went to the major Republican candidates, with Cogdill winning 18% and Donnelly winning 16%. The split created an opening for Green candidate Dan Hamburg. Hamburg was polling surprisingly well through most of the race, often coming in a close third or fourth in the mix of Bass, Clooney, Cogdill, and Donnelly. On election day, Hamburg eked out a second place finish with about 19% of the vote[3]. Hamburg even won the most votes in Humboldt, Mendocino, San Francisco, and Santa Cruz counties. Some polling prior to Clooney dropping out indicated that Hamburg could have done even better had Clooney been the main Democrat in the race, but Bass was able to pick up more of the progressive vote that may have otherwise gone to the Greens. Hamburg congratulated Bass in his concession speech and said that while he lost, he felt confident that the new governor would be able to work with the Greens in the state legislature to accomplish their shared goals and hopes the Democrats and Greens would build a working relationship in the legislature.

With the successful recall, Darrell Issa has served the second shortest term of office in state history. His 232 days as governor of California beat out the third shortest term of Washington Bartlett, who served for 247 days in 1887 before he died, by just two weeks[4]. However, neither Bartlett nor Issa come close to the briefest governorship on record. That goes to Milton Latham. Latham was elected governor in 1859 and took office on January 9, 1860. However, Latham almost immediately proposed to the state legislature that he be appointed to fill a vacancy in the United States Senate. The legislature agreed and Latham was appointed to the Senate on January 14, serving a term of just five days as governor. Governor Issa's reaction to the news was a graceful concession speech, wishing governor-elect Bass the best, but there does seem to be an undercurrent of anger at the loss. Unlike in 2003, there are no plans yet for anything similar to the several public appearances together that accompanied the transition from Gray Davis to Arnold Schwarzenegger. Some California Republican officials have also lashed out at the result of the recall, calling the result a "sham" and pointing out that with one of the causes for the recall being Issa's election on less than a majority of votes, Bass being elected with just a third of the recall vote is even more illegitimate and hypocritical from Democrats. Bass expressed a desire to work with both Republicans and Greens in the legislature to solve the state's ongoing budget crisis and said she would prioritize a solution to education funding in particular. Bass plans to call a special session of the legislature in October. Bass will be inaugurated in six weeks on October 4th once the election results are fully certified by the state.

***

Yee, Kim Campaigns Divide San Francisco’s Asian Community In Potentially Landmark Mayoral Race
September 5, 2011

SAN FRANCISCO - The San Francisco mayoral election campaign is in full swing. As the Greens face an important test to see if their strength in the city can survive without Matt Gonzalez, Democrats are eager to win back what used to be one of the safest Democratic cities in the country. The front runners in the race are currently state senator Leland Yee and sheriff Michael Hennessey, both Democrats, and county supervisor Jane Kim, the leading Green in the race. Both Yee and Kim are vying to become San Francisco’s first ever Asian-American mayor, which would be a historic moment for a city where one third of the population is of Asian ancestry. With both Yee and Kim running, however, Asian-Americans are not united in their choice of candidate, and both polling and organizers for the two campaigns have reported the 2011 mayoral election has drawn some sharp divides within San Francisco’s Asian-American population.

The most noticeable divide between support for the Yee and Kim campaigns is one of geography. Yee, a state senator who has represented the southwest neighborhoods of San Francisco in various offices from school board to state senator for nearly twenty years, naturally draws most of his support from that part of San Francisco. This includes the Sunset and Parkside neighborhoods in western San Francisco that have served as Yee’s political home base for his entire career. Neighborhoods in southeastern San Francisco such as Visitacion Valley and Bayview, two areas often overlooked by city officials, have also been a fertile base of support for the Yee campaign. Kim, meanwhile, represents the 6th district in the county board of supervisors. Her base of support comes from the more connected Asian communities of downtown San Francisco such as Chinatown and parts of the SoMa neighborhood. Notable for both candidates’ geographic support bases is that they are largely Chinese-American neighborhoods, showing some of the deeper divides that have grown among different parts of the Chinese communities in the city.

While the geographic divide is the primary split between Yee and Kim among San Francisco’s Asian community, it is tempered somewhat by the other two divides. The first deeper divide, and most complicating a straightforward geographic concentration of support for the Kim campaign, is based on ethnic background and older versus more recent immigrants. While Kim does have the support of Rose Pak and her political influence in Chinatown and North Beach, the broader support of the Chinese-American community in San Francisco as a whole still seems to side with Yee. Yee’s trailblazing career has included a number of firsts for the Asian and Chinese communities. In 2004 Yee became the first Asian American appointed speaker pro tempore of the California state Assembly, the second highest ranking position in the body. In 2006 he became the first Chinese-American elected to the California State Senate. Outside of the Chinese community, Yee also seems to have a lot of backing from the Vietnamese community. Yee's longevity in politics and accomplishments make him a known and trusted quantity for many more established Asian immigrants and higher-generation descendants. The Kim campaign, meanwhile, is getting the backing of more recent immigrants and newer Asian communities such as San Francisco's growing Indian and Filipino communities. Support for Kim has also been growing in the Korean community - Kim herself was born to Korean parents, though she grew up in New York City - and among Japanese San Franciscans, building support for the Green candidate in western San Francisco in Sunset and Richmond, two neighborhoods that have not typically been receptive to the Green Party and what would normally be considered part of Yee's geographic support base.

Along with the divide between more established and more recent immigrant communities, the Kim and Yee campaigns have also had something of a more typical generational gap in support for the two mayoral candidates. At rallies and on the campaign trail, it is more common to see seniors and older people attending and volunteering at Yee’s events, while younger supporters are gravitating toward the Kim campaign. Some of this divide is simply reflective of the age of the two candidates. Yee was born in 1948, while Kim was born in 1977. However, part of the gap is also due to the more general age split that is taking form in San Francisco’s politics. The emergence of the Green Party as a viable political force has pulled many young voters and organizers away from the Democratic Party in San Francisco, while older voters in the city have largely stuck with the Democratic establishment. Among Asian-Americans the divide takes on a distinctly cultural shape though, tying in with the divide in background and recency of coming to the United States. Younger generations of Asian-Americans in the city are often second or even third generation. Older Asian San Franciscans also tend to be first or second generation Chinese or Vietnamese immigrants, and may have a wary stance toward a party that some, including members of the Green Party themselves, have branded as "socialist" and having ties with the Chinese Communist Party.


[1] Admittedly not the most likely choice, but I decided it was narratively interesting and, given the more unique circumstance of Chow being an MP and unprecedented situation, it was plausible enough. It's also much more of a short-term continuity selection.
[2] Connecticut For Lieberman did have the goal of running a candidate against Lieberman in 2012 in OTL, but Mertens only got 0.6% in 2010 so didn't have automatic ballot access, and Lieberman announced his retirement in 2011 anyway.
[3] I still need to work out the exact numbers and will do an infobox soon, but rounded it's something like 32% Bass, 19% Hamburg, 18% Cogdill, 16% Donnelly, 9% Takei, and 4% Reed Hastings
[4] Fun fact, the shortest time in office for a California governor was Milton Latham, who served for five days in January of 1860. He was inaugurated and then immediately ran for and was selected by the state legislature to fill a vacant Senate seat.
 
San Francisco Mayor Matt Gonzalez Announces Campaign for President
September 15, 2011

SAN FRANCISCO - More than a thousand people crowded into a corner of Dolores Park in San Francisco’s Mission District on a warm and pleasant evening yesterday. The occasion for the gathering was a rare sight, particularly for San Francisco: a presidential campaign announcement. The crowd eagerly awaited the announcement many had been hoping for for years. After nearly five years of speculation, San Francisco’s Green mayor Matt Gonzalez finally announced he would run for higher office. The office Gonzalez is seeking is not just Congress or governor, but the highest office in the land. Mayor Matt Gonzalez announced last night that he will run for the Green Party nomination for president of the United States in 2012.

Gonzalez, speaking from the San Francisco Mission neighborhood where he has lived for over a decade and which originally elected him to the board of supervisors, opened his announcement speech with the slow but steady path he has taken to reach this point and his ability to turn a long shot campaign into a winning one. “When I was first running for mayor of San Francisco,” Gonzalez said, “I started at maybe three to four percent. Because my campaigners and I worked hard, we reached out and connected with voters, and our hard work slowly built and eventually became a winning campaign nobody saw coming.”[1] Gonzalez said what he did in San Francisco he can now do in the country as a whole, noting that McCloskey got just over 3% of the vote in 2008. “So I’m starting from the same position I was at in 2003. I'm an outsider, but I've got experience and I've shown I can win over people to my side." To illustrate his point, Gonzalez brought on as his campaign manager Steve Schmidt. Schmidt has experience working with "out-there" campaigns as well as organization building in the Green Party. He worked as a senior adviser for the 1992 presidential campaign of Jerry Brown. Schmidt joined the Green Party after that year’s election, and ran himself as a candidate for lieutenant governor alongside Roberto Mondragon’s 1994 gubernatorial run in New Mexico. That year, Mondragon and Schmidt won over 10% of the vote, one of the most successful of the Green Party's early state campaigns. Back in the present in San Francisco, Gonzalez's speech promoted a slogan of “justice for all” in its appeal to the Dolores Park crowd. Drawing on Gonzalez’s professional experience as a public defender, the campaign kick-off focused on issues of economic justice, environmental justice, and social justice in its themes. Gonzalez also noted his youth - he was born in 1965 and would be 47 at inauguration, only a year older than Bill Clinton when he became president - as a mark of a transition to a new generation of leadership. As a member of Gen X, even if he barely misses the traditional cutoff for the Baby Boomers, Gonzalez believes he is more in tune with the issues facing younger Gen X and Millennial voters and can get them to turn out and vote.

Gonzalez’s announcement does not come as much of a surprise to political insiders. He has been a highly anticipated entrant into some race for higher office for years, with speculation of a presidential run spiking after he turned down running for reelection as mayor earlier this year. Besides Gonzalez, two other candidates have also entered the race for the Green nomination so far. Maine state senator John Eder was the first to announce his candidacy in August. Gary Swing, who ran for Colorado’s 1st congressional district in 2010, announced a run for president at the beginning of September. Gonzalez with last night’s announcement becomes the third candidate for the Green nomination next year. He may not be the last to jump in the race though. 2008 vice presidential candidate Cynthia McKinney has expressed an interest in running. Other potential candidates include Jill Stein of Massachusetts and Jesse Johnson of West Virginia.

With his entry into the race, Gonzalez now joins John Eder as the front runners for the Green nomination. After McCloskey earned over 3% of the national popular vote in 2008, the Greens are already optimistic about improving on their performance from three years ago. Both Eder and Gonzalez would be strong choices for the Greens in achieving this goal. One thing both have on their side is experience, being two of the longer veterans among the Greens' current crop of officeholders. Eder was the first Green Party candidate to win election to a state legislature and has served in Maine’s state house and senate since 2003. Gonzalez has been mayor of San Francisco also since 2003, and is widely considered to have been the start of the current rise of the Green Party as a national force. Besides their relative wealth of experience, Eder and Gonzalez also create a primary between the two ideological wings of the party. Gonzalez seems to be emerging as the candidate of the more ideological left wing of the party, considering the platform outlined on his website and the early endorsement from Howie Hawkins. Eder and campaign manager John Rensenbrink meanwhile are aligned with the less strictly ideological, more environmentally focused wing of the party.

Those factors seem likely to give the Green Party a competitive primary, and Gonzalez is already making preparations for early rallies. While his term as mayor is not up until the end of the year, Gonzalez has already made plans for campaign trips to some of the states that hold primaries for the Green Party. There are plans on his campaign website for a rally and organizing tour up the Pacific coast in northern California and in Oregon and Washington later this month. His campaign has also reported that Gonzalez has plans for trips to two early primary states. The Arizona Greens plan on holding their primary in February, and the campaign says it plans on a visit to the state sometime before then. In a more ambitious early visit, Gonzalez’s campaign says he plans on holding rallies in New Hampshire, where the Green Party will participate in the first in the nation primary alongside Democrats and Republicans. With New Hampshire close to both Eder and Stein’s home states, it will be a tough state for Gonzalez on the other side of the country. Campaigning in New England though would show that Gonzalez is serious about his campaign and seeks a nationwide appeal. The mainstream political focus on the New Hampshire primary could also boost media coverage of the Green primary, a benefit for all candidates involved.

***

Occupy Movement Returns With ‘Occupy Wall Street’ Protest in New York
September 17, 2011

NEW YORK CITY - Almost exactly six months ago, the series of protests known as the Occupy movement that rocked the United States and even countries beyond began. The Occupy protest camps and demonstrations that followed through April and May was the largest series of demonstrations seen in the United States in a long time. Occupy protesters called for action on a number of issues, but most prominent were demands for more consequences for Wall Street bankers who they believed were not taken to task for their responsibility in the causes and severity of the Great Recession. The Occupy movement seemed to die down at the beginning of summer, with many pointing to the largely student-driven protests diminishing due to the academic year ending and colleges letting out for the summer. Now, with the new school year and lower fall temperatures well under way, the Occupy protests have seemingly come back for a second round.

This time, the center of the Occupy protests has gone from the Wall Street of the West in San Francisco to actual Wall Street in New York City. In an interview published in the New York Times, AdBusters editor Micah White, who emerged as a leader figure in the original Occupy protests, spoke about the timing of this revival of the Occupy movement and what the goals are in comparison to the original protest. White revealed that today September 17 was originally intended to be the real start of the Occupy movement with the San Francisco demonstration in March intended as a sort of test run of the organizing and how many people would respond to the demonstration. However, when the March Down Montgomery attracted as much positive response online and quickly sparked other demonstrations elsewhere, White says the intended decentralized nature of the Occupy movement and its leadership took hold made the lasting effect of the protests what they were.

But why did they initially plan for September 17, and why are they continuing with the demonstration in New York City months after the initial wave of the Occupy movement died down. White said the protest in front of the New York Stock Exchange on Wall Street that began this morning is to mark the tenth anniversary of September 17, 2001, the day the New York Stock Exchange reopened for trading following the 9/11 terrorist attacks[2]. Hundreds of protesters initially gathered at a rally outside the Stock Exchange early this morning and blocked entry into the exchange for hours, delaying the start of in-person market trading for much of the morning. After police showed up and told the crowd to disperse, the protesters retreated to a staging area south of the exchange at Bowling Green Park, near the location of the famous Charging Bull statue emblematic of Wall Street. A group of over one hundred protesters remain in Bowling Green Park, while many of the initial protesters in the morning left over the course of the day.

This decision of the day and place for the new Occupy protest has drawn both support and criticism. While some of the supporters of the original Occupy movement were still supportive of the renewed New York demonstration, the timing of the disruption to New York City’s financial district so close to the tenth anniversary of 9/11 has spawned a harsh backlash. Conservative critics such as House Majority Leader Eric Cantor have called the renewal of the protests just a week after the anniversary “disrespectful to the first responders”, while radio host Rush Limbaugh described it as “desecrating the memory” of the September 11 attack. Still, public opinion on the Occupy movement is somewhat supportive, though heavily divided after the initial wave of support for the movement ebbed over the summer. A Gallup poll reported an even amount of approval and disapproval for the Occupy movement, with 42 percent of the country in each column and 16 percent undecided. The protest today will likely be a test of the lasting impact of the movement. While sporadic protests claiming association with the Occupy movement occurred over the summer, this is the largest to be directly coordinating with Occupy organizers since the breakup of the Bankers' Heart camp in May.

***

Republican Betty Ireland Elected West Virginia Governor In Special Election
October 4, 2011

CHARLESTON, WV - The special election for governor of West Virginia today returned a result that should be a concern for president Clinton. Acting governor Earl Ray Tomblin lost election for the remainder of the term Tuesday to former West Virginia Secretary of State Betty Ireland. Tomblin, a Democrat, served as lieutenant governor in his position as senate president until governor Joe Manchin was elected to fill the United States Senate vacancy left by the death of Senator Robert Byrd. West Virginia is a state that has been a Democratic stronghold but that has trended Republican in recent years. After George W. Bush won the state in both of his elections, Clinton lost the state by eight points in 2008. While Clinton thinned the 2004 Republican margin by nearly 5% that year, Democrats are hoping the state will be a potential flip in the president’s reelection bid after promising signs in the midterms saw all three of West Virginia’s Democratic representatives win reelection. However, today’s result casts some doubt on those hopes.

Trouble for Democrats and governor Tomblin began in the primary. While Tomblin became acting governor after Manchin left, the primary in May meant that Tomblin had just six months as governor to go off of and was not treated as an incumbent. Tomblin attracted three main primary challengers: Secretary of State Natalie Tennant, speaker of the house of delegates Rick Thompson, and Tomblin’s successor as senate president Jeff Kessler. Tomblin won the primary by a comfortable eight points over Tennant as his nearest rival, but a 39-31 primary victory was not nearly the rousing party backing for a full term that Tomblin was hoping for. The Republican primary was even more crowded than the Democrats’, but for the GOP the race came down to just three candidates; former Secretary of State Betty Ireland, businessman Bill Maloney, and state senator Clark Barnes. Barnes won much of the eastern panhandle and his home Randolph County, but remained a regionally locked candidate. A few other candidates won single counties. Larry Faircloth carried Berkeley, Mitch Carmichael won Jackson, and Mark Sorsaia won Putnam. But while Maloney put up a strong challenge to Ireland, she remained the favorite throughout the primary and won off a strong showing in the southern and central parts of the state.

Tomblin began the general campaign with a significant lead over Ireland, but during the months leading up to the special election the race narrowed to a tossup. The national political environment played a major role in Tomblin’s defeat. Renewed unrest in Africa as the African Spring continues across that continent created uncertainty in oil markets and a rise in gas prices. Domestically, the shaky roll out of the public healthcare option introduced with the HillaryCare 2.0 reforms has hurt voters’ confidence in Democrats, while a series of attack ads from both Ireland’s campaign and national Republican organizations associating Tomblin with the public option and a perceived government takeover of healthcare led nearly 30% of conservative Democrats to cross over to vote for Ireland according to exit polls. Ireland portrayed herself in ads as a steady and experienced hand on state government while she was Secretary of State, including a number of statements from state Democrats praising her conduct in the office. In the final vote tally, the number of conservatives who crossed the aisle in the typically Democratic state were enough to swing the election to Ireland and give the Republicans another rare win for a West Virginia state office. Ireland won 47.4% of the vote to Tomblin’s 45.1%. She will become the state’s first woman governor.

In a circumstance that is becoming more and more common around the country, one of the reasons for the Republican victory in the election was the presence of a strong Green candidate. Charlotte Pritt, the candidate for the Green-affiliated Mountain Party, received over 7% of the vote, over three times the margin between Ireland and Tomblin. Pritt was a veteran officeholder and candidate as a Democrat before switching affiliations to the Mountain Party last year. She served in the state senate from 1988 to 1992, and ran for state office as a Democrat three times during the 1990s. In 1992, Pritt ran for governor but came second in a three-person primary to incumbent governor Gaston Caperton. After losing the primary, Pritt ran as a write-in that year, winning nearly 7.5% of the vote. In 1996, Pritt again ran for governor. That year, Pritt defeated Joe Manchin, then also in the state senate, in the Democratic primary but lost to Republican Cecil Underwood in the general election. In 2000, Pritt faced Manchin again in the Democratic primary for West Virginia Secretary of State, but Manchin soundly defeated her. On the campaign trail this time, Pritt said her return to seeking office after years away was out of a renewed feeling she could make a difference in West Virginia. Amid the Green Party’s national rise, Pritt’s ardent environmentalism and progressive pro-labor views made her a top choice for the Mountain Party. Despite the loss and some say spoiling the race, Pritt was upbeat in her concession speech, calling it “a step on the path to changing West Virginia for the better” and showing that Green politics is still alive and well in coal country.

***

Green Candidate Farheen Hakeem Elected to Replace Veteran Senator Linda Berglin
October 19, 2011

MINNEAPOLIS - In August, state senate Linda Berglin retired after nearly four decades on the job. The Minneapolis senator, who has served in the state legislature since 1973 and in senate district 61 for thirty of those years since 1981, announced in July that she was retiring to take a position as a policy program manager for Hennepin County. Berglin’s retirement created a golden opportunity for a Minneapolis politician to move up the ranks, as governor Mike Hatch scheduled a special election for October. Berglin’s forty years in the legislature made her a highly influential member on healthcare policy, including helping to craft the MinnesotaCare program in the 1990s to provide access to health insurance to lower income families who did not have insurance through their employer but did not qualify for Medicaid. Berglin said that the Republican takeover of the state legislature after last year’s elections was one of the reasons for her retirement. After losing her position as chair of the senate Health and Human Services Committee with the chamber going to Republican control, Berglin said that was the signal to her that it was time to move on from the legislature.

Senate district 61 covers much of south central Minneapolis, along the I-35W corridor from I-94 almost to the Minnehaha Parkway. The district comprises some of south Minneapolis’s more diverse neighborhoods such as Phillips, Central, and Bryant, and the candidates in the special election reflect that diversity. In the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party primary in September, the two major candidates were Jeff Hayden, a San Francisco-born black state representative, and Sadik Warfa, a Somali-American community activist. The Green Party candidate, Farheen Hakeem, is the daughter of Indian immigrants and is Muslim. Hayden, one of just two black legislators in the state house, received the bulk of endorsements in the DFL primary and won easily against Warfa and four other candidates. However Warfa, who last year ran as the Independence Party candidate for the other state house race within the senate district[3], pulled a significant amount of the vote netting over 30% in the primary. Warfa’s performance was not enough to defeat Hayden, but it does show the growing clout of the Somali community in Minneapolis.

It is the additional fast-growing Green influence in Minneapolis that won out in the general election though. Farheen Hakeem is a national Green Party organizer and has run for local and state office in the area for several years now. In 2008 Hakeem ran against Hayden in house district 61B, in 2009 she ran for Minneapolis city council, and in 2010 she launched a failed quixotic campaign for governor. Hakeem, born and raised in Chicago, is a math teacher and girl scout troop leader while also serving as national co-chair of the Green Party. She has used her positions in education and leadership as bridges to connect with a number of communities and has become known for her efforts to combat Islamophobia and racism in the city in both her political and community roles.

The election highlighted some of the divides taking place among progressive and minority communities in Minneapolis and across the country. Hayden drew on his experience in the state legislature and his family’s long history in the Bryant neighborhood, one of the older African-American neighborhoods in Minneapolis, telling voters his family has been living in the neighborhood for nearly one hundred years. Hakeem, meanwhile, talked up the growing support of more recent immigrant communities in southern Minneapolis. While she is not Somali herself, Hakeem gained a strong support base from Somali and other immigrant activist groups during the runup to the election, including an endorsement from Hayden’s primary challenger Sadik Warfa. Hayden also touted his stance as a progressive and fighting in the legislature for funding child welfare services and his community support for affordable housing programs. However, Greens such as Hakeem have called out Hayden for his failure to accomplish those goals in the legislature. While Hayden notes that both chambers of the state legislature are currently Republican-controlled, for many younger voters and those further on the left such as Hakeem’s Green Party, that is not enough of an excuse for failing to advance desired policies.

When voters went to the polls yesterday, it appears Hakeem won out in turning out her base for the special election. In a race marked by very low turnout[4], Hakeem won by a seven point margin over Hayden. Hakeem received 1,495 out of 3,116 votes or 48% while Hayden received 1,256 votes or 40.3%. Republican Bruce Lundeen received 221 votes or 7.1%, and Matt Brillhart of the Independence Party received 144 votes or 4.6% of the total. With her win, Hakeem will be the first ever Green Party state legislator in Minnesota. Her victory is a mark of the growing strength of the Greens throughout the city of Minneapolis, where the party also has three seats on the city council. In the other special election held yesterday in senate district 46 in Minneapolis’s northwestern suburbs, DFL candidate Chris Eaton easily defeated Republican Cory Jensen and Independence Party candidate Tom Reynolds to fill the vacancy left by the death of Linda Scheid. Both Hakeem and Eaton will be up for election to full terms in 2012, though in slightly different districts. Hakeem’s district has been renumbered to district 62, while Eaton’s district will become district 40. In district 62, a rematch between Hakeem and Hayden is widely expected as the DFL Party will no doubt hope to regain the seat.


[1] I worked in a bit of a line from Matt Gonzalez's 2008 interview with Democracy Now where he was interviewed as Nader's running mate. Full interview here
[2] This was also the reason behind the location and date of the first OTL Occupy protest.
[3] In Minnesota, each state senate district is numbered and contains two state house districts, A and B. Hayden represents district 61B while Warfa ran in district 61A. Warfa came in second in 2010 ahead of the Republican with over 11% of the vote.
[4] For comparison, in 2010 senate district 61 had a total of 17,420 votes. And the 3,116 votes I have here is actually a few hundred votes more than the OTL turnout for the 2011 special election!
 
Dixon’s Defiance Divides Democrats in Baltimore Mayoral Race
November 9, 2011

BALTIMORE - Yesterday’s election finally moved the saga of Baltimore mayor Sheila Dixon forward into a new chapter after years of controversy at the city’s highest office. Dixon rose to the height of the Baltimore political ladder five years ago when she replaced Martin O’Malley after he was elected governor in 2006. Dixon easily won election to a full term in 2007, but her time as mayor has been thrown into a drawn out scandal after an investigation against her and a jury indictment on embezzlement, misconduct, and perjury allegations. Dixon, a Democrat, has remained obstinate in her denial of the allegations against her throughout multiple trials while continuing to serve as mayor of Baltimore and even run for reelection this year.

However, while mayor Dixon has been steadfast in her denial of the charges, the drawing out of the trials against her has divided city and party opinion. In the runup to the September primary, the slow progress of mayor Dixon’s retrial for her embezzlement and perjury allegations[1] attracted a number of Democratic challengers as Baltimore's party establishment tired of the growing media circus surrounding the mayor. Council president Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, state senator Catherine Pugh, civil servant Otis Rolley, Circuit Court Clerk Frank Conaway, Baltimore Democratic Committee member Nick Mosby, and two others were the candidates in the Democratic primary against Dixon. With so many in the primary, pressure within the party mounted for Dixon to not run for reelection. In summer, the mayor announced that she was withdrawing from the Democratic primary and would instead run as an independent candidate, throwing the race for the Democratic nomination wide open.

With Dixon out of the primary, Rawlings-Blake and Pugh soon emerged as the front runners from the crowded field. Dixon’s ongoing trial and her mayoral record continued to be a major issue in the primary. Pugh and Mosby called on mayor Dixon to resign her office amid the scandals facing the mayor, while Rolley was the only prominent candidate to come to Dixon’s defense. Rawlings-Blake attempted to stay neutral, calling Dixon’s trial a distraction from the issues facing the city. The September primary attracted a low turnout. The odd timing of the primary led to fewer votes. Dixon also still had a number of supporters who stayed home further depressing turnout. With just over a quarter of the nearly 300,000 registered Democrats participating in the primary, Pugh won the nomination with just under 30,000 votes and under 40% of the total primary vote. Rawlings-Blake and Mosby came second and third in the race. The low turnout spelled low enthusiasm for Pugh, but typically the Democratic primary in Baltimore was the real contest and the following general election would be a guaranteed win. This election however would be different. Mayor Dixon's independent candidacy would throw a major wrench into the usual formality of a Baltimore mayoral race.

Dixon’s defiance had garnered both detractors and supporters over the years during her trials as the rift between the mayor and some of the Democratic establishment deepened. With Dixon campaigning as an independent, her supporters who had sat the primary out could come back in force in November. This turned a formality of a campaign into a tough fight for a closely contested race. Aside form Dixon, the Green Party also now saw an opportunity to present its case to the city. The party nominated for mayor Glenn Ross, an East Baltimore community activist who describes himself as an “urban environmentalist.” Ross has been leading “toxic tours” of East Baltimore for over five years, highlighting the city’s legacy of environmental racism and public health issues in poorer black neighborhoods. Ross’s campaign, supported not just by Greens but also by Democratic presidential candidate and NACCP head Ben Jealous, took aim at more entrenched Democrats like Pugh and Dixon, saying they were more concerned with appearances and ego and weren’t getting at the heart of the problems facing poorer communities in Baltimore. Yesterday’s election showed many Baltimoreans agreed with Ross. In an election that had even lower turnout than the primary, Ross won with 23,391 votes, or 37.4% of the total. Pugh received 18,472 votes or 29.6%, while Dixon received 14,443 votes or 23.1%. Republican candidate Vicki Ann Harding received 6,108 votes or 9.8%. Ross was able to climb to the top amid a divided Democratic base between those who supported and opposed mayor Dixon. Along with Ross, the Green Party also won a select few seats on the city council. Bill Barry, director of labor studies at the Community College of Baltimore County, won election to district 3 on his third attempt at the seat over longtime Democratic councilman Robert Curran. In district 7, union organizer and former congressional candidate Virginia Rodino defeated Democratic incumbent Belinda Conaway. Conaway, daughter of clerk Frank Conaway, faced allegations of living outside the city and attempted to sue a blogger for $21 million for defamation. Ross’s victory in Baltimore continues a string of high profile mayoral wins for the Greens and marks the first time the Green Party has won a mayoral race in a major city on the east coast.

***

Small Towns, America’s Heartland Fertile Ground For Green Party, Not Just Big Cities
November 10, 2011

CARBONDALE, IL - Since the Green Party has started making waves in American politics, the main centers of the party’s strength has been in the major cities. A lot of attention has been given to the Greens’ success in mayoral and city council elections in places like San Francisco, Oakland, Seattle, and Minneapolis. The recent hype that's occurred over the Green victory in the Baltimore mayoral election as the first major city on the east coast to elect a Green mayor is demonstrative of this. However, focus on the win in Baltimore leaves out many other, smaller cities and towns where the Greens have recently made great strides in municipal elections across the country. These other successes show that the Green Party is not just appealing to urban demographics, but does have pull among voters even in America’s heartland.

In Wisconsin, for instance, a lot of attention has been given to Angela Walker’s mayoral win in Milwaukee earlier this year, but the Green Party has actually held a significant presence in the state for decades. Dating back to the 1980s, the Green Party has been winning city and county elections in the state for over a quarter century. The Greens are also continuing to build on that strength. Communications professor Tony Palmeri was elected mayor of Oshkosh, a city fifty miles from Green Bay with over 60,000 people[2]. Palmeri served on Oshkosh’s common council before being elected as mayor. Another Green common councilor made the jump to mayor in Stevens Point in central Wisconsin. Former Wisconsin Green Party co-chair Amy Heart defeated mayor Andrew Halverson in his bid for reelection. Heart previously ran an unsuccessful bid for mayor in 2003 and was elected to the common council in 2007. Finally, in Madison, the Greens continue to excel in a city where they have had a presence for a while. Kyle Szarzynski ran for alderman in Madison’s 8th district after working on Ben Manski’s near-win 2010 campaign for state assembly. Szarzynski narrowly won in the April council election. He and Jonathan Dedering join four other alderpersons in the Madison common council, bringing the total number up to 6 out of 20 representing over one fourth of the council.

One of the characteristics of places in Wisconsin where the Greens have done well that is translating to the rest of the country is relative success in college towns. Madison and Oshkosh as homes of two large University of Wisconsin campuses show this, but it can also be seen elsewhere in the country. Younger and more educated voters have formed part of the core Green voter base in recent years so the growth in college towns is not surprising. The most notable of these is in Carbondale, Illinois. Home to Southern Illinois University, Carbondale is where two-time Green candidate for Illinois governor Rich Whitney calls home. In his second run for governor, Whitney managed to win one county: Carbondale's Jackson County. It is fitting then that Carbondale elected Whitney’s daughter, Jessica Bradshaw, as the city’s mayor after she served in the city council since 2007. Charlie Howe, who ran for state assembly last year, has also been elected to the Carbondale city council. Elsewhere in Illinois, Knox College professor of environmental studies Peter Schwarzman was elected to the city council of Galesburg[3]. Schwarzman has been heavily involved in community organizations in Galesburg where he has been a faculty member at Knox College since 1998. Green Party candidates have also been successful in college towns in the Mountain West. In Boulder, Colorado, home of the University of Colorado, Mark Ruzzin served on the city council from 2001 to 2009 and was mayor from 2004 to 2007. In 2007, he was joined on the city council by Angelique Espinoza, who continues to serve after being reelected in 2009[4]. Lastly, John Meyer, founder of the Cottonwood Environmental Law Center in Bozeman, Montana, was elected mayor of the city of 50,000 people and location of Montana State University. Bozeman is also where another prominent Green officeholder lives. Kathleen Williams is a state representative and one of the two Green members of the Montana legislature.

While college towns are some of the more expected places to find Greens doing well in municipal elections, more mid-sized cities have also seen Green victories this year as well. Some of these such as Ben Chipman’s election as mayor of Portland, Maine and reaching a Green majority on Portland’s city council are expected given the Greens' history in Maine and Portland specifically. Others however are in cities that show the Greens gaining new ground. In Hartford, Connecticut, Elizabeth Sheff unseated mayor Eddie Perez, winning over 5,000 votes in a three candidate race against state senator Eric Coleman and Perez, who was running as an independent Democrat after losing the party’s endorsement amid a corruption scandal. Sheff is a former Hartford city councilwoman elected as a Green from 1991 to 1995 and 1999 to 2001[5], and she is most known as the plaintiff in the 1989 landmark Connecticut court case Sheff v. O’Neill on the state’s obligation to correct inequalities in educational access created by racial isolation and segregation. Outside of New England, the Green Party has also put in strong showings in several Rust Belt cities, echoing the successes in cities like Baltimore and Carbondale. Dennis Kucinich’s 2010 gubernatorial running mate Anita Rios won election this year to the Toledo, Ohio city council. In Gary, Indiana, IU Northwest sociology professor Jack Bloom won over 4,000 votes in an ultimately unsuccessful mayoral bid against former Indiana attorney general Karen Freeman-Wilson. Cariol Horne, a former Buffalo police officer who was fired in 2006 and lost her pension after stopping a fellow officer who had a handcuffed suspect in a chokehold, ran as the Green nominee in the special mayoral election created by former mayor Byron Brown’s election as lieutenant governor of New York. Horne was leading in polls early in the campaign, but acting mayor David Franczyk won the election to serve the remainder of Brown’s term by nearly 8% against Horne in second with councilman Michael Kearns in third on the Republican and Conservative line.

Going even further into the heartland, the Green Party has also gained elected office in several small towns. This also is not just in small towns on the northern California coast like Arcata or Fairfax, both of which have gained news attention as tiny dots of local Green dominance over the decades, but in more "middle America" parts of the country too. In 2010, Bobby Tullis won election as mayor of the 1,200 population town of Mineral Springs, Arkansas after running for state offices as a Green in 2006 and 2008. In neighboring Louisiana, Green Party member Morgan Moss Jr. was elected mayor of Rayville, a town of 3,500 people, with over 500 votes for Moss[6]. Moss’s win as mayor was one of the signs of improvement for the Louisiana Greens that led to the push this year that elected two Green state representatives. Out west in Colorado, Greens saw further gains in races for small town mayors. City councilor Thom Carnevale was elected mayor in the ski town of Telluride, where another veteran Green Party officeholder Art Goodtimes still serves as county commissioner. In Manitou Springs, a resort town west of Colorado Springs, environmental activist and artist Becky Elder was elected mayor over first term mayor Marc Snyder.

***

Green Endorsed Slate Sweeps Mayor, City Offices in San Francisco Elections
November 13, 2011

SAN FRANCISCO - It has taken a few days since voters went to the polls to fully tabulate San Francisco’s ballots. This is due to the city’s use of ranked choice voting for the elections for mayor and other municipal offices, which require multiple rounds to eliminate candidates. As voters eagerly awaited each ballot drop since Tuesday night, most eyes were on the race for the next mayor. Outgoing mayor Matt Gonzalez was the first Green Party member to hold the office in a major city. Gonzalez has served as mayor since 2004, but despite the further success of the Green Party since then, the question of whether the party would be able to hold onto the city that started it all has dogged any potential Green successor to Gonzalez. Three front runners jostled for position as the votes and rankings came in: Democratic county sheriff Michael Hennessey, Green supervisor Jane Kim, and Democratic state senate Leland Yee.

The mayoral race traded places between Hennessey, Kim, and Yee throughout the lead-in to election day. The initial vote drops during election night on November 8th didn’t clear things up. As the instant runoff calculations were made on ballot counting that came in on the first night, all combinations of two of the three frontrunners reached the final round and at different moments each of the three appeared to win. Further votes fully tabulated by the morning settled the race down to either Hennessey or Yee going up against Kim in the final round. John Avalos quickly emerged as the solid fourth place candidate, the only one besides the top three to receive over 10 percent of the vote in the first round. Avalos has openly affiliated himself with the Green Party since being elected as district 11 supervisor, and much of his support in the mayoral results has followed his lead, moving to Green leader Kim far more than the two Democrats. The final certified results released this morning ended the penultimate round with Yee edging out Hennessey to reach the last round of the runoff. Yee’s support continued to be strongest in the southwestern neighborhoods, but the final round ended up a race between the more progressive Kim and the more establishment liberal Yee. Hennessey’s progressive record as county sheriff and his support of some Green-endorsed candidates in other municipal races led to a majority of Hennessey voters shifting to Kim. In the final round, Kim defeated Yee with 54.7% of the vote, a 9.4% margin over the Democrat. Kim’s total is about one percent less than Gonzalez received in the final round of the 2007 vote, but the margin is solid for the Greens holding on to the mayor’s office without an incumbent.

The Greens maintaining control of San Francisco’s highest office was already a good sign for the party, but the signs of the party’s strength in San Francisco did not stop there. In fact, candidates endorsed by the Green Party swept all citywide offices up for election this year. One of the races was merely a formality as city Public Defender Jeff Adachi faced only token opposition for reelection. Adachi, a longtime friend of Matt Gonzalez and a colleague at the public defender’s office before Gonzalez was elected to the board of supervisors, received both the mayor’s and the Green Party’s endorsement despite being a registered Democrat. Adachi won reelection with nearly 90% of the vote. The race for county sheriff was more competitive to replace outgoing sheriff Hennessey. However, the consistent leader in the sheriff’s race was Ross Mirkarimi, a veteran Green campaigner. Mirkarimi, a longtime Green Party member, had been manager of Matt Gonzalez’s first successful mayoral campaign in 2003 and succeeded Gonzalez as district 5 supervisor where he served until 2008. Mirkarimi had since advised in city offices under Gonzalez and made another run for office in 2010 before running for county sheriff this year. Mirkarimi won handily, partially on the back of an endorsement from Hennessey. Hennessey praised Mirkarimi for his experience in the city and progressive credentials[7]. While some viewed the Mirkarimi endorsement as a cheap political attempt by Hennessey to peel off Green voters in the mayoral race, Hennessey's term as sheriff has been known for his progressive policies and the endorsement was likely pivotal in giving Mirkarimi a boost above the other sheriff candidates to win the sheriff’s race with 62.1% of the vote over two other candidates in the first round.

The most surprising result was the contest for District Attorney. In that race, the Green Party endorsed two candidates, defense attorney Randall Knox and criminal justice reform advocate David Onek, against incumbent Democrat Kamala Harris. While city offices are nonpartisan, the parties regularly make endorsements and made multiple throughout this year's elections. Harris was a favorite to win reelection at first, as she had won reelection in 2007 with little opposition. However, after her 2010 state attorney general election defeat, a negative momentum began to build. A few progressive challengers were expected to jump into the DA race as Knox and Onek did. But when both candidates started to pull Harris down, Bill Fazio began to rise as a Harris replacement. Fazio, a criminal defense attorney, had run for DA multiple times before. In his last run in 2003, Fazio came in a narrow third in a three way race, earning over 30% of the vote against incumbent DA Terence Hallinan. Harris won out over the more progressive Hallinan in the runoff by a 13 point margin. This time however with ranked choice voting and with the Greens further on the rise, the progressive-liberal split was more even. Hallinan and Gonzalez endorsed Knox as their first choice and Onek as their second. Neither endorsement came as a surprise, as Knox had been campaign treasurer for Gonzalez in his first election as mayor and Hallinan was perhaps the most left wing district attorney in the city’s recent history. The local and state Green parties also made a show of endorsing Knox, while the Democratic establishment naturally coalesced around the incumbent Harris. A more unexpected endorsement came from the Bar Association of San Francisco. The BASF co-endorsed both Knox and Harris after a vote by the members[8]. Fazio also somewhat surprisingly listed Knox on his rankings as the third choice, citing that Knox at least having argued a trial, while reserving no small amount of ire for Onek only interacting with the law in an academic background with no direct trial experience[9]. Fazio’s elimination in the second round sent most of his votes to Harris, but the question of whether Onek or Knox would face her remained. In the third round Randy Knox emerged as the man who would go up against the incumbent district attorney in the final round. It was expected that a majority of Onek’s votes would go to Knox, but it was questionable whether enough would shift to push Knox over the edge. With this in mind, the final round result comes as somewhat of a shock. The Green Party’s Randy Knox unseated District Attorney Kamala Harris by a 4.6% margin in the closest city election of the year[10]. With Knox elected DA along with the election of Jane Kim and Ross Mirkarimi to their posts and Jeff Adachi’s reelection, candidates endorsed by the Green Party have completed a full sweep of the city’s elected offices.


[1] Dixon's plea agreement and resignation in 2010 in OTL was an unexpected outcome to the embezzlement scandal, and at the time it was widely believed that she would instead call for a retrial. That's what happens here.
[2] Palmeri lost the mayoral election by 3.5% in OTL.
[3] Schwarzman was elected in OTL, served on the city council for three terms, and is currently mayor of Galesburg.
[4] A little hometown stuff from me. I actually didn’t know Boulder had a Green mayor at one point, but I’m not surprised. Also in OTL Espinoza was a Democrat and left the city council in 2009 (I think she was elected in a special election in 2007?). She later narrowly lost a state house primary in 2016.
[5] Sheff left the Green Party in 2004 in OTL.
[6] In OTL, Moss got 28.4% with 302 votes in that race. He also ran for mayor in 2018 and got 37.4% with 219 votes.
[7] Hennessey also endorsed Mirkarimi when he ran for sheriff in 2011 in OTL (Mirkarimi had left the Greens and was a Democrat by this point).
[8] An endorsement from the Bar Association of San Francisco requires 30% of the vote from the members, so it is possible for them to endorse multiple candidates.
[9] A complaint Fazio made in OTL when Onek was running for DA in 2011.
[10] A bit on Randy Knox, he thought about running against Harris in 2007 in OTL but decided against it because he felt he couldn't beat her.
 
2011 San Francisco mayoral election first round

Jane Kim: 28.2%
Leland Yee: 23.2%
Michael Hennessey: 20.7%
John Avalos: 12.1%
Bevan Dufty: 6.4%
Chris Daly: 5.5%

HIJBThs.png
 
Top