With all due respect, Kari, unless it's YOUR wedding, I think you are exhibiting shockingly poor priorities. %^>

3 cheers for Meredith - hip, hip, horray!! :)

Congrats to Meredith,

To Mac, Dan, and Carol, let's all roll up our sleeves.. 2008 is just around the corner.

To rural and urban dems, let's work out the differences. Why? Because we can and it's the right thing to do.

Sorry I couldn't be down there today, just a little under the weather.

Go Dems!

Congratulations Meredith! I have a high level of confidence that you will kick ass and take names.

AMAZING NEWS! Jesse Cornett just was elected Male Vice Chair of the Democratic Party of Oregon!!!!

He entered the race at the last moment and won!

More to come but a HUGE round of applause to my man, Jesse!!!

My goodness, Moses, that sounds like cheerleading for a highschool popularity contest. Which I'm very worried that it became.

I respect Jesse tremendously, but I'm not sure he really thought completely through the commitment that being the Acting (alternate sex) Vice Chair represented before he ran. After he won he looked like a deer caught in the headlights.

It doesn't help that Meredith set the standard for Vice Chair. Can he afford - on top of everything he already does - an additional volunteer effort of 30 to 40 hours a week, and all that driving?

As much as we need young people as leaders of the Party, there's a reason why it's usually retirees like Meredith and Bill Kroger who take the top spots. They've already finished their careers and raised their family. They can do the job full time.

And I'm not even sure Jill Thorn can help much. The same-sex Vice Chair has no duties under the bylaws; she can't just step in for Jesse in many situations. And, quite frankly, I'm not sure she'll even be able to, given that she intends to also remain the Chair of Clackamas County, and also hold down a full time job.

Kudos to Jesse for the win, I suppose. He proved himself the most popular with delegates. I just wish that if he'd wanted this position, he would have put in a couple of good nights sleep on it before applying.

Too late now, of course. We'll just have to support him as best we can.

Steve, no cheerleading, just pleasantly surprised that someone under the age of 50 could be in an important leadership position within the DPO.

Please keep in mind that Jesse has more experience than Bill within the local political community (his State Senate run, working with Bluemenauer, etc.). Its not a popularity contest, its who can best represent our membership.

So the only arguement that you have left against Jesse is whether he has the time to devote and quite frankly, you disrespect him by alluding that he didn't take into account the time committment. Whenever you make a decision to run for a leadership position within the party, you, of course, realize that it will take some of your precious time. But you step up because of your willingness to serve the party and the cause. The time committment is a given.

So how about you allow Jesse the opportunity to do what he was voted in for. Obviously, the majority of the voting delegates plan to.

Some people may not like what I have to say, but it needs to be said.

DPO positions are not ceremonial. They're not a glorified Prom Queen and Prom King. There is serious work commitment behind them - assuming, of course, that we all want the DPO to be taken seriously in Oregon politics.

Don't believe me? Ask Jim Edminson, who spontaneously laughed at Meredith's lowballing officer time at 30 hours a week.

Nothing I said implied that Jesse can't actually do the job of Vice Chair. He's already proven himself very capable. The question is what, in the rest of his life, will he give up to meet the commitment he just made?

That is a serious question. It demands a serious answer. And if Jesse is half as capable as I think he his, he's thinking really hard about it right now.

Well, I'm done here with my low class comments. I'll let you guys go back to your discussion about how our new DPO chair is a hippie grandma with the political sense of a 5 year old.

Reflecting upon my first ever DPO meeting as a voting delegate it struck me how powerful old time friendships are in comparison to the right skills, personality, experience and powerful network one candidate had. We had an opportunity to move the DPO into the 21st Century. We had an opportunity to become a relevant organization. We had an opportunity to mount a powerful new way of supporting candidates through out Oregon. We had a real chance to begin our stategy to knock out Gordon Smith.

Now we have the same ol'. I wanted the candidate with a new rolodex or Blackberry with different and important connections, not the same ol' dog eared rolodex. I wanted a candidate who understands how to pry open the money vault at the DNC. I wanted the candidate who understood that the folks with causes like cleaning streams, universial health care and more, are filled with young eager and energetic younger people who would join us if we had leadership that encouraged their participation. Now we'll have bylaws and platform committees spinning their same ol' wheels.

The Jackson County DPO delegates waited until we'd heard every speech, then we held our own straw poll. Each of us supported Dan Carol. We recognized in him the potential for powerful connections to the DNC and with Howard Dean and his modern set of skills.

The insiders club prevailed yesterday. Jesse will struggle with 'this is how it's done Jesse' when he knows full well those days are nearly over.

Many of us wondered if Dan Carol's enormous skills would be wasted in a slow moving organization that hesitates to embrace the way politics really works now days.

To each reader who has a fire in your belly for the Democratic Party take heart, find your candidates, work like hell for them, and let's knock out Gordon Smith and Greg Walden.

To each newly elected officer all the best.

I know I'm not the first one to suggest this but Dan Carol seems like a good fit for the ED position. Is this a possibility?

Geeze, guys,

What we have is a team, and a pretty danged good one too.

There is no single insider team. There are several that shifted alliances right there in the room as the runoff dictated.

Forgetting the inside baseball stuff and just looking at what was out here on Blue Oregon for the past two weeks, we can draw a few conclusions.

On the Flickinger, Pender, and Bradbury endorsement posts we saw a past chair and many other political players come out supporting Mac. We also saw some serious surging for Dan in both the Blue Oregon straw poll and on Kari's live blog from inside the room.

In the votes and jockeying, you can see some insider groups have lost some clout. Some insurgent groups didn't have quite as much push as they might have liked, but these groups now can decide whether to redouble their efforts, change tactics, form new alliances, or whatever going forward. Infighting will continue, but all teams seem to be clear on the goals and will, I think, work well together.

Since Jesse was a big supporter of Mac, you could safely assume that Mac's supporters will have a voice at the very top of the Org. Meredith's supporters, including myself, are pretty clear that she can both out think a preschooler, and avoid being manipulated like a puppet. Jill has a history of not only of completing her own duties with skill and timeliness, but has also jumped in and saved a few efforts assigned to and neglected by others. She's the ultimate nuts and bolts Git Er Dun girl. We are in very good hands at both vice chair positions.

Since a man's gotta dream, I can dream that the new powers might look to Dan and Mac when thinking ED thoughts. I have no idea if anyone wants 'em or if either of the two is interested, but either would be a kickass ED in my opinion.

Prediction: We will have a Mean Machine for the '08 run.

Here is hoping you are correct Pat.

In the meantime there is a widening generation gap. Dan Carol provided concrete examples of how we could change the growing indifference evidenced by the lack of "comers" such as Jesse. We all know many voters are semi-affiliated with both Democrats and Republicans and have chosen to become non-affiated voters or Independents.

Here is hoping Jesse will light the flame inside the DPO.

Pat Ryan Since a man's gotta dream, I can dream that the new powers might look to Dan and Mac when thinking ED thoughts. I have no idea if anyone wants 'em or if either of the two is interested, but either would be a kickass ED in my opinion.

Well I don't know about Dan, but I asked Mac right before the results of the first vote whether he'd consider taking the Executive Director position. He politely turned the idea down flat, since he said he had a job he already loved.

I then politely declined to ask him the obvious question that came from his response: if he felt unable to meet the time commitments for the paid E.D. position (with everything else he did), did he really have time for being Chair of the DPO?

Again, I hate to be a broken record about this, but the DPO's executive positions should not much different than the E.D. position. (I mean other than a grand sounding title in lieu of a salary.) If you have time for much of a life outside of being Chair/Vice-Chair of the DPO, you ain't doing the job right.

And I do want the job done right. That's quite a bit more important to me than whose friends from what county gets to say "that's my man up there".

I nearly completely agree with you, Val. That's why I signed off my original comment with "We'll just have to support [Jesse] as best we can."

And in fact, if the DPO had double the money it does, we could afford to give the Chair and Vice-Chair compensation. If he was doing this as a full time job, my concerns with Jesse - which, by the way Sadie, has nothing to do with youth - would be completely allayed.

But the problem is that, as my brother learned spending ten years working for food (and not much else) at an environmental NGO, nearly all the money goes to the bad guys. We have to work twice as hard just to keep up. We're already behind in fundraising.

I wish this wasn't so. But it is. And we can help our officers only so much. We can't actually stand in for them, for example, at any Party function.

But yes, to make things absolutely clear, I do fully support Jesse as Vice Chair. One of the tasks I expect from him to finish soon is a full accounting of what he feels he can delegate.

First of all, Sadie. I'm not a delegate. I'm an alternate. And not even a first alternate. I'm the second alternate. I got as much voice as you did in the selection of the Party officers: none. I was quiet as a mouse during the entire proceedings.

Second, despite your opinion that representative Democracy is not actually "Democratic", we have a long tradition of it in our country. Check with your local Congressman or Senator; I'm sure they'll back me up on that point.

Third, if you really want the privilege of being delegate to the DPO, there is nothing that keeps you from running yourself. You might also get, like me, the grand feeling of being bumped up from Third Alternate to Second Alternate, when the party increased in size. Wow!

And finally, while it seems that you have a problem with my opinion about something, you haven't actually said exactly what it is. And you're not the only one. Apparently, in a Democratic website, saying a guy should have a salary constitutes an attack on him.

I'm still trying to wrap my mind around that logic.

The DPO is a representative organization, much the way the DNC is, the Oregon legislature is, the US Congress is. You elect representatives, then either trust them to do what's right or try to influence them in whatever way you can. And if you don't like what they do, you can put in the time and effort to become a delegate to the DPO or DNC or to replace your legislator.

It really doesn't take that much to gain ground in political parties. You show up. You do some work. You run for party office and ask for votes. I encourage everyone to go take part. You could be on the State Central Committee in two years for the next reorganization--and hey, the DNC seats are up in two years too. It's not that hard. Believe me, we're all just a bunch of ordinary people with a high tolerance for meetings.

Wayne Kinney and I are members of the DPO's administration committee as Oregon's representatives to the DNC are considered officers in the newly adpoted bylaws. The Admin committee, which also includes Meredith, Jesse, and Becky and our appointed treasurer (Mike, did you accept?) will be taking the lead in finding a new executive director and setting direction for the party. We're meeting tonight.

I'm quite happy with the selection of people that I'll be spending lots of time in meetings with over the next two years. They all bring something different and special to the table. I don't expect that we'll agree with each other all the time, but that's half the fun. I think we'll see a more collaborative approach, more inclusion of the grass roots, more emphasis on involving young people, and a concerted effort to address rural Democrats' concerns. And further honing of the political machine that Howard and Jim and Neel built.

I hope you'll give us not only your ideas, but also your energy. There are a zillion things that could be done but we lack resources to do them. So, when you get ready to throw a brickbat at the DPO for not doing something, I ask you to ask yourself, "What could I do personally to make this happen?" Can you donate money, donate your skills, find the people with the right skills?

I was quite intrigued by Dan Carol, and would love to have his energy stay with the party in some capacity. Mac Pritchard, your quiet competence gets things done. Bill Kroger, we need your PR expertise; Rosalie Pedroza, we need your union connections; Barbara Wright, your rural focus. We need all of you.

I am gratified by the interest in the election, the work by the candidates, the enthusiasm of their supporters. Remember, these are jobs that people had to be coerced to take only a few years ago. Nobody paid attention then. I take all of this as a sign that our party is growing. It's a bit like making sausage, but I hope the results will be a Smith-free Senate, more votes in the Oregon House, and creeping blueness spreading out from its Willamette Valley islands. Thanks to everyone who participated, and to everyone who cared.

Retributions, recriminations...?

Let's get off that negative path shall we?

Why don't you see more younger people at state-level meetings? They've got to get interested enough and then be able to committ time at the county level in order to even be voted to come to these things. When was the last time anyone over 50 actually voted at the county level for these younger folks to come to state level meetings?

Is there a time when those of us over the age of 60 might actually be willing to step aside and let the next generation start taking the reins?

I think it's not just resume building that consumes young folks, it's overcoming those who treat their position in the party as some permanent right, kinda like a boxer well past their prime who doesn't know when to quit.

Conversely, the other fly in the ointment is that baby boomers are retiring in droves and are looking for things to do.

There is no reason in the world we can't have both youth and old timers working together. The bus project has been doing that for some time now.

As Jeff Smith has said so often, it's about having better ideas.

For me, it's not sniping at someone or something because either your candidate lost, or change doesn't come fast enough.

It has been said the democracy is messy and takes time, it's also not for those who think change for change's sake makes everything better. People scoff at Robert's Rules, yet, I've had experience at the other end of that, where everything had to be by consensus. You think Roberts Rules are boring, try making decisions by pure consensus in any group with over 50 people.

The problem isn't the rolodex or the blackberry or my space. those are just methods of organization and communication. The real solution is learning to build lasting relationships, instilling trust, and working like hell when you are asked to show up....

Our problems right now are fund raising, branding and communicating our message.
Let's get to work...

Whoops! My Very Bad.

Jill Thorn is also part of the Admin committee for the DPO and I mistakenly left her off my list. Her on-the-ground knowledge of running a county party and her ability to simply get things done will be invaluable.

Hey Mark,

You are correct in the sense that:

1. We need a stategic plan

2. We need to attract and embrace another generation

3. We need user-driven technology like MoveOn

4. We need regular and robust polling for trend and candidate analysis

5. We need to utilize the knowledge capital in every County in the state

6. We need to identify hidden social networks

7. We need to identify barriers for success in achieving the stategic plan

Off the top of my head, I observe the changing of the officers as a predictable event that can be well managed or not. Some of us understood the glimpse of the future in Dan Carol. That said, an organizational consultant would do wonders for this organization.

I want to believe the best about this site and the people behind it. But there's a real credibility point swinging in the wind here. Yesterday's live-blogging showed how easy it is - two minutes work - to post or update a news article. So where's the big announcement of who won the races? Why has a race previously so important for the past few weeks suddenly become no longer worth two minutes work writing up the results?

BlueDog... The results HAVE been posted here. Or maybe you haven't been reading.

In any case, the simple reason there hasn't been another new post is that I was at a wedding. (Maybe you read about that schedule conflict in my post.) Had a lovely time with family and friends at Edgefield - was up way too late, slept in, dropped by my mother's house, and now I'm back.

Sorry to have annoyed you, but BlueOregon is an all-volunteer labor-of-love. And sometimes that means that real life reasserts itself.

When was the last time anyone over 50 actually voted at the county level for these younger folks to come to state level meetings?

I was very intrigued by Meredith's statement during the forum that she'd like to explore adding an affirmative-action element in the delegate selection process to guarantee some portion of younger delegates.

I'm hoping to discuss that with her at some point and bring that conversation here to BlueOregon.

Kari

I would love to hear what the affirmative action plan is all about. Thanks.

Yeah, me too. We already have the gender-balance rule, and we certainly have some ethnic numbers when we do national convention selection, but not sure what else we're already doing... Something, though, to help encourage young people to get involved would be good. (And I think, in this case, we're talking "young" as being under-35. Which is sort of hilarious, but tells you how bad things can be.)

Since you're quoting me, Disappointed, I probably should answer.

First, I can't agree with your assertion that retirees are so "elite". Just as a reminder, nearly everyone comes to an age where they can enjoy the exalted status of being an old retired fogey. So you need to explain how this state of affairs is "elitist".

Second, I've never argued that this is the best for the Democrats. It's just the best of a bad situation. In the absence of sufficient funding (which we don't have because unlike the GOP we don't sell laws/no-bid contracts to the highest bidder), the Democratic Party can't afford to pay people what they're worth. Hell, we can't afford to pay most of them at all.

The lack of money does not make the work go away. In fact, it increases it. That's why the Party has relied in the past on finding accomplished retired people, guilting them into running, completely burning them out, and finally at the end, giving them a nice wooden plaque and a round of applause at the end thanking them for their years of unpaid service.

It ain't pretty. But we know it works.

Now we're trying the same thing with younger people who actually should have a life. This may also work. Who knows? But I reserve the right to worry.

I was one of those under 50 people there at yesterday's meeting (under 30, actually). I was there from the start of the caucus meetings in the morning, until adjournment. That allowed me not only to see a lot more and give my input more than some people who arrived late, but I also got bumped from alternate to delegate. And I wasn't even the top alternate-- I was all the way down the list at the next to the last delegate slot.

I'd like to see more young people involved; however, I was very concerned with how things were handled yesterday. But anyway, onto young people and delegate spots...

One thing the Young Democrats of American (YDA) found out some months ago is that the charter of the DNC actually lists youth as one of the groups it is supposed to make sure gets a fair share of the delegates to the national convention. All this time it has been ignored.

A lot of us wrote to the DNC, asking them to follow their own charter and make some kind of requirement for youth to be included.

I'm glad to see at least one state will hopefully be following those guidelines.

As I've already said, I plan on running for National Delegate again. I ran in 2004, but didn't make it. While I'm under 30 now, I'll actually turn 30 a few months before we vote on delegates.

Well, hot damn, there it is on page 10. (pdf)

To encourage full participation by all Democrats, with particular concern for minority groups, Blacks, Native Americans, Asian/Pacifics, Hispanics, women and youth in the delegate selection process and in all Party affairs, as defined in the Bylaws, the National and State Democratic Parties shall adopt and implement an affirmative action program which provides for representation as nearly as practicable of the aforementioned groups, as indicated by their presence in the Democratic electorate. This program shall include specific goals and timetables to achieve this purpose.

Of course, it doesn't define "youth" - and some might argue that is means non-adults (under 18)... which would mean that there aren't any "youth" in the electorate - and thus zero delegates.

But if you assume that it means that we should have a plan to bring in younger people than the median age, well, that's a different ball o' wax.

Kari--

Yea, all this time we didn't know it was there. The YDA was reviewing the DNC's charter and such to put together a plan for getting more youth involved as delegates, and that's when they found it. The then pointed it out to the DNC.

Since the DNC has always considered youth to be those 35 & under, they can't very well go back on that now.

From the YDA site:

"In a response, the DNC argued that the Charter in this case was trumped by a resolution relating to delegate selection that passed in 1980. While that resolution did not specifically exclude youth, it did not mention them either."

There's a whole bunch more info on it here: http://www.yda.org/actions/118/convention-delegates

Exactly, the organizational culture of the DPO, unknowingly, (usually) reduced broad-based representation with the telling example of reducing the size of the executive committee and reducing representation from the five congressional districts by changing to "at large" positions on the executive committee. The potential for less regional representation on the executive committee is a likely result.

The widening generation gap in Democratic County Party organizations, while troubling, is the responsibility of each Democratic county organization to correct. We need to cultivate diverse representation in our DPO delegates. I feel an obligation to find the Autumn Wilburn's (DNC Field Rep) and send them into what poster DISAPPOINTED described, as the "ossified mental culture".

A chair, Sadie, is much more like Speaker of the House, or perhaps Prime Minister, than it is President. Chairs don't have a veto. In fact, in most things, they don't even have a vote. Their job is one of facilitation, along with being the public face of the Party.

And insofar as Delegates not being accessable, I'm really not sure what you're talking about. In Washington County, where we're both from, the top male delegate is Jon McWilliams, an absolute sweetheart. And on the female side, it's Jennifer Warren, a gigantic ball of bouncing energy in female form. Both are overwhelmingly accessable; they show up everywhere. If you didn't corner them somewhere to give them your opinion about who should be DPO chair, you obviously didn't try.

And that last lesson needs to be generalized. The Democratic Party is accessable. But we're also all volunteers here. We don't have the time or energy to cater to people who don't bother to show up to do the work.

You may think that unfair; others may think it elitist. But it is the natural emotional reaction that a group of committed volunteers have to the kind of person that we've all seen from time to time, who think that Democratic activism consists of attending a few meetings, telling the rest of us volunteers what "the Democrats" should do, and then (not really considering themselves as such) leaving - refusing to any of the unfun stuff (phone banking, canvassing, cutting turf) themselves.

That's why my ears turn off as soon as I hear "The reason I don't get involved with the Democratic party...", followed by our supposed deficiency of the week. Because I know that whatever comes next is just an excuse. The positions of the Party are controlled by the people who've earned the greatest respect from their fellow volunteers; they get that largely in proportion to how much they've worked to keep our Party together in the face of the Republican onslaught. So if you feel you're not being listened to, don't look at us. Look in the mirror.

Don't petulantly demand respect. Earn it.

Jenni and Kari, to get those under 35, like me, to be active in any way in this party, it will take more than affermative action and forcing the older generations to vote for us. It is very difficult just to get a younger crowd to show up in the first place.

Absolutely. Agreed. 100%. But opening up the delegate slots is a good start - and an incentive.

1. Bravo to Kari for the DPO coverage. What a pleasure to experience the excitement(?) of a DPO reorg meeting while watching college basketball.

2. Congrats to Meredith and the new DPO leadership. We're all pulling in the same direction (even though it doesn't always seem that way--we're Democrats after all) and we all need to get behind the new team.

3. Regarding the National Convention, there are hard requirements regarding the gender of delegates and soft "goals" for ethnicity and sexual orientation. The "goals" are specific (i.e. 2 Asian or Pacific Islanders). There have not been goals related to age since I've been involved in this (starting in 1980). Oregon has regularly had a very age-diverse delegation (in 1988 we had the youngest and oldest delegates--18 and 92 IIRC). The one point to remember is that delegates either pay their own way or are paid by an outside organization (my union, the American Federation of Public Employees paid my way in 2000). It's very expensive and any potential delegates need to think about how they are going to afford attending.

Paddy, the national convention is mostly a party. I'm more interested in the state delegates... I understand that we've got pretty hard rules about gender, and not much else.

Last time I checked, Sadie, you are involved in the Democratic party. You just didn't run for Delegate, and didn't bother to lobby anyone who won.

I'm not going to get into a "who's a better activist" pissing contest with you. However, I must note that, not having enough time to personally attend - say - Naral meetings (other than the occasional fundraiser), I don't go around complaining that I don't have a say in picking the members of their leadership.

If you don't have time, or can't bother, to participate in the internal processes of an organization, don't complain that you don't hold much sway with them. It really is that simple.

Kari--Sorry I missed the distinction and you are exactly right, the National Convention is a party (with a small p). It always reminds me of a political class reunion--I like just wandering to see who I run into that I haven't seen in four years.

The makeup of the State Central Committee should probably be looked at. Although it's set in statute, the party could almost certainly decide to ignore that and decide on a new structure. Small counties are WAY over represented (and I am not saying that is a good thing or a bad thing, but it is a fact). Perhaps the new party leadership might put together a group to look at the structure and see if it makes sense and whether we should look to me more progressive about inclusion ala the National Convention.

To reply to Paulie:

"Exactly, the organizational culture of the DPO, unknowingly, (usually) reduced broad-based representation with the telling example of reducing the size of the executive committee and reducing representation from the five congressional districts by changing to "at large" positions on the executive committee. The potential for less regional representation on the executive committee is a likely result."

That's not right, but thank you for suggesting that we weren't thinking things through. The State Central Committee clearly wanted a more effective Executive Committee, and felt that the old one (at 43 people) was too large. As for regional representation, the old rules had far greater potential for inequities in regional represenation -- three of the five districts are in the Portland area. The new rules mean that the Portland area can't have more than half of the "at large" members. Further, one of the amendments Saturday would have eliminated those "at large" members, elected by State Central Committee members, and replaced them with the congressional district chairs. Hard to imagine that as an improvement for regional representation (three chairs are from the metro counties), and it would have reduced the voting power of the delegates.

Your second comment, however, is spot on:

"The widening generation gap in Democratic County Party organizations, while troubling, is the responsibility of each Democratic county organization to correct. We need to cultivate diverse representation in our DPO delegates. I feel an obligation to find the Autumn Wilburn's (DNC Field Rep) and send them into what poster DISAPPOINTED described, as the "ossified mental culture".

State law, as Paddy wrote, does specify how many delegates each county has, but it's not too difficult to make changes, although I wouldn't support reductions for rural counties. Most of the counties have delegations too small to have representation goals on the order of the DNC convention delegation. When I was chair of the Platform Committee for the 2000 and 2002 conventions, I introduced representation goals, and because the county delegations were larger (one delegate for every 1,000 Democrats), they were applied to many of the counties. If we were to have representation goals for the State Central Committee, we would probably have to elect them by congressional district rather than counties. I'm open to something like that, as ossified as you seem to think I am.

Also, their voting record is out in the open and easily accessible - so I know if I like having them represent me (and I do).

Actually, all the delegates' votes are public as well. We had to sign our ballots each time, because technically we are elected officials. And as such, our ballots for officers are public record.

With the exception of female vice chair, which was unanimous, all of the votes for officers had printed ballots. All printed ballots either had a signature on the back, or they weren't accepted. Those signatures can be matched to their signatures when they picked up their ballot, in the case of unreadable signatures.

For those, like paulie, who are concerned about the changes in the executive committee, I recommend getting involved in the rules committee or find the people for your Congressional District who are involved. The positions are filled by the people who represent each of the Congressional Districts. Often times there are openings. I know you don't have to be a member of the CD to be on a committee, but I'm not sure if you have to be a PCP. I think the only requirement may be that you have to be a Dem in that Congressional Dist. to be put into one of the open slots.

There are numerous committees you can serve on -- personally I am on the campaign committee.

I just get this feeling there are a lot of people out there who want to complain, but aren't willing to come into the party structure and work to change things. Believe me, everyone knows the Party isn't perfect. And everyone has their own little list of things they want to see fixed. But all of us involved in the Party only have so much time -- and without enough volunteers to do everything, those of us who are involved end up doing a lot more on each project, which means less gets done.

Want to see change? Get involved:

• Become a PCP (Precinct Committee Person).
• Get involved in your county party.
• Run for delegate/alternate positions with your CD (Congressional Dist) and/or the SCC (State Central Committee.).
• Join a county-level committee.
• Join a state-level committee.
• Join a caucus. Isn't one that fits your needs? Start one.
• Come to the SCC meetings, committee meetings, etc. -- these meetings are open to the public. Only delegates/members can vote on items, and some actions are limited to delegates/members only.

Complaining from the outside won't get anything changed. You have to come in and get involved. And you have to realize that change doesn't happen overnight. I've been involved in the state party since late 2000. There are changes that I'm still working on. But there are many, many changes and improvements I have seen.

Many times, all it takes is coming in with the idea and the willingness to take it on. I can't tell you how many things I've seen that we'd like to do on the county-level, but just lack the people willing to take it on.

Thanks to all for this lively discussion.

Steve, perhaps you thought I was like a deer in the headlights because I am far more accustomed to being in the audience talking to the delegates about issues of the day rather than sitting on a stage looking at them. Or maybe it was because I was looking so intently for Bill Kroger, whom I'd just defeated but wanted to extend a kind word to (as Blue Oregon readers know, I have lost a race recently myself and know it's not easy) AND pledge to work with him to find a meaningful role in our Party. In either case, neither is a reflection on leadership.

As for working full time doing this... I never pledged to do that. There is a huge distinction in management, number of hours one can contribute, and leadership. On Saturday we elected our new leaders, not management or those who can work the most to whatever end. It does happen to turn out the new Chair plans to devote full time to this (for the first time in the Party’s history), but we should not make that a requirement. Then only the wealthy or retired could serve, and that would be a disservice to the grassroots volunteers because we would mostly be locked out. Anyhow, soon the new leadership will hire a new executive director, who will be the manager and thus must be there full time.

To address a couple of other concerns, YES, we must engage veterans. They have a critical voice in our process. As a former Reservist, I am humbled that they consider me in their ranks.

To those of you who think there was an attack campaign… get real. Meredith is also a long-standing friend and political ally. There was no point in this race where I would have attacked her, or not fought back against anyone who did.

Kari – am I confused, did we become a news site? Because I thought we were all about opinion and helping the progressive agenda. Just checking.

And Steve Bucknum: Learning the ropes? What the heck are you talking about? Are you unaware of how long I’ve been kicking around the Democratic Party? Longer than many. I am pretty sure that if Party experience is the measure, I still win.

For those interested in Jesse's bio, it's right there on our contributors page.

Jesse's been an activist stalwart, and been more involved in the party apparatus than most of us. If you think that BlueOregon is a major part of the progressive communications infrastructure, Jesse is one of the ones to thank. If you think that the Bus Project is a major part of the progressive organizing infrastructure, Jesse is one of the ones to thank.

As for experience within the party, last I checked that's the criteria with which they elect national convention delegates (since the official job function is basically to party hearty)... and Jesse qualified for that way back in 2000 and again in 2004.

Don't make any excuses, my friend. We're happy to have you there.

Congratulations, Jesse. Let's make this thing work. I trust that with some smarts, we can implement your vision of depending less on the top officers handling the Party's day-to-day management. That would be healthy for all involved.

(Just make sure whoever you get to replace Neel is as much as a workaholic as he was.)

As far as Bill Kroger is concerned, don't worry about him. The Colonel is a tough old bird. And besides, I'd told him 3 weeks ago that with all the overqualified applicants for Chair, he only had a small chance of getting the position. If Dan, Mac, or Carol had wanted the 2nd level spot, I think any one of them would have been a shoo in. Correct me if you think I'm wrong.

Jesse said: the new Chair plans to devote full time to this (for the first time in the Party’s history)

My friend, you have to be careful about historical absolutes when dealing with old farts like me that have been around for a while. Two state chairs in the 80s did the job full time: Dick Celsi and Judy Carnahan. That's as far as my Oregon history goes back, so there may have been others before then.