YDA

New project sponsored by the Young Democrats of America launched this week asking what issues matter the most to folks and why they are voting Democrat this November

Visit WhyDA

Check out this handy map posted at the new YDA blog. It tells you on average how much students stand to save in each state based on the new interest rate drops on student loans I blogged earlier this morning:

As I mentioned yesterday, if Day 1 at YDA was all about internal business and caucuses (activities which do, btw, continue throughout the conference), then the second day was all about action. As I've written in the past, YDA is still undergoing a transformation from a networking organization that provided manual labor for state parties and candidates into a chapter-based field organization focused on peer-to-peer GOTV of the often neglected youth vote. Day 2 was all about pushing that peer-to-peer program. Here's Tony Cani, YDA's political director breaking it down:

As Tony explains, the vote pledges - and the establishment of metrics for attaining pledges on the state level - are the focus of the day. The pledge cards - which declare the signatory's intention to vote for a Democrat in the fall, is really just the entry point to a whole series of "touches" - via text message, facebook, phone calls and door-knocks - that end with the person pulling the lever for Obama in the fall. It's also a way for YDA National and YDA chapters to measure their work - providing valuable information about the capabilities of the organization as well as data that can be used for fundraising purposes during the next cycle.

Most of the day is structured around trainings in peer-to-peer- organizing as a way to gather vote pledges. These include community service projects (the Democrats Work model), concerts and festivals (the MFA/Head Count model), campus organizing, online organizing (with a focus on Facebook and state blogs) and more. The day was capped off with a field exercise in which 10 teams competed to gather the most vote pledges as possible - online and on the streets of downtown Nashville - in the span of one hour.

Not everyone was thrilled with this use of YDA time. As I've written before, not all YDA members and chapters are bought-in to the new, peer-to-peer model, and there seemed to be some resistance to the idea of the vote pledges. At the YDA conference I attended in New Hampshire last Novembe, at the YDA Fall Conference, very few attendees participated in the field trainings. Instead, many chose to ditch YDA and canvass for their preferred presidential campaign. This time around participation in field training activities seemed to be on the rise, though still below a majority of conference members. The culture of the organization - who it's members are and how they view YDA's place in Democratic politics - continues to change, but it seems like they're still a ways to go before everyone drinks the peer to peer Kool Aid.

Rock the Vote and YDA are going international:

So real quick on the campaign committee. First a bit about what it is. National YDA - which raises money from large donors like the Democracy Alliance - has a program through which they partially fund state chapters. This is called the State Partnership Program. State chapters wishing to participate in the program draw up a plan, submit it to YDA National where it is vetted. Successful applicants will receive half the funding for their plan from National YDA and they are required to raise the rest of the funds themselves.

These state partnerships are in turn funded in two ways: through the Party Building Committee and the Campaign Committee. The Party Building Committee funds organizational overhead like Executive Directors and staffers and non-campaign activities that help build a chapter. The campaign committee funds specific projects to get out the vote around elections. These campaign proposals were the main topic of discussion.

Participants (mostly regional representatives) had a few main concerns:

• Was YDA running out of money and unable to afford supporting new/more campaigns?
• Could YDA open up the funding process (transparency!) and let states that have made proposals know where they stand?
• Could some kind of review metric be established and enforced to make sure states were living up to their commitments?
• Could guidelines be established that would push states to make their programs self sustainable, freeing up YDA money for other state campaigns?

In all these instances members wanted more information available and wanted to spread that information amongst the membership to alleviate unwarranted fears/gossip, and help chapters help themselves. For instance, thus far the committee has approved 11 of 26 campaign proposals. A few members were pushing the committee to release a ranking of the proposals so chapters could know where they stand in the process and could potentially use an "endorsement" by YDA National of the strength of their plan to raise money locally. (For instance, if the "12th" best plan - and first "unfunded" state - knew that but for funding shortages, they would receive money from YDA National, that's a selling point they can use to raise local money. Again, greater transparency was pushed as a good policy to strengthen the organization.

A word on the money question. I don't want to leave readers with the impression that YDA is running out of money and is broke. That seems to be the fear among some chapters but everyone tells me it's not true. But there does seem to be less money in play this year overall that in 2004. My guess is that, excluding non-electoral organizations like Young People For and Campus Progress, which don't do fieldwork - there is far less youth money available or in play right now than there was in June 2004. Maybe it's because of the ongoing primary or Obama's success with youth, maybe it's donors feeling burned (and it should be noted that as far as I can tell the Rappaports - one of the major youth donors over the last 4 years - have yet to give to any youth orgs). But just when we should be increasing youth funding to begin locking in Millennials for the next 40 years, the funding seems to be drying up or at least on hold.

Sorry I'm not live-blogging much from YDA. I'm having issues with the WiFi and can't get reception anywhere except in the hotel lobby. Here's my thoughts on Day 1.

The YDA National Convention is split into two parts. On the first day - when most participants are still flying in - the organization takes care of internal business. Committees meet, people speak in a foreign language based on Robert's Rules of Order, and YDA generally takes care of all of it's internal business for the next quarter. All meetings are open to the public and anyone can attend. The second day is much more action-oriented and I'll have some thoughts on that later.

Yesterday I was able to sit in on two meetings - so this isn't at all a representation of the whole conference, just my limited experience. These were the meetings of the Judicial Committee and the Campaign Committee. In both instances, organizational transparency seemed to be the root topic up for discussion.

The Judicial Committee needs something of an introduction. It's been over a decade since this committee last met. The cause for it's revival was ostensibly an internal dispute regarding YDA's Bylaws and tax status, which prevent YDA from endorsing candidates, and public declarations by two of YDA's three superdelegates as to their intentions in casting their Super Ballot at the convention. In reality, it was more about the internal politics of the organization and people in leadership positions (or wanting to be) mucking up the waters in preparation for the next YDA officer elections.

David Hardt, the President of YDA (and at the time of this writing an undeclared superdelegate), referred the matter to the committee, requesting a determination as to whether Crystal Straight and Francisco Domenech, YDA's DNC committeepersons, violated the rules when they declared their intention to vote for Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton (respectively) at the convention. Also on the table was whether or not Francisco and Crystal should be impeached from their positions if it was determined that they had violated the organization's bylaws.

In talking to a few people, Hardt is understood to be operating as a proxy for Chris Gallaway, YDA's previous president, as well as Chris Anderson and Billy Joyner, who want to move up in the YDA leadership after Hardt's term as President ends. Crystal is seen as a top contender to be the next YDA President and on some level this was all about fucking with her potential candidacy. It's all internal politicking, which is unavoidable when you get to this level in any political organization. It's exacerbated by the fact that YDA has become a somewhat powerful organization in recent years. They have a budget in the millions of dollars now and with the youth vote surging, YDA's stature in party politics is likely only going to rise making leadership positions more powerful, more coveted, and thus more competitive. It's one of the less attractive parts of Party politics, but it does make for much more politically savvy operatives. Democrats are always getting out-played procedurally by Republicans, and this sort of thing teaches our future leaders how to play brass knuckles on that playing field. And compared to what the College Republicans do to each other this is like touch football.

After a brief scuffle over the rules as to whether or not the committee could deliberate in a closed, executive session (they couldn't), the committee unanimously voted that Francisco and Crystal did not violate YDA rules, but not before some very interesting issues were brought up regarding organizational transparency. During her presentation to the committee, Crystal stated that her declaration was not only lawful, but good in that it let the membership hold her accountable. Rather than cast a secret, unannounced ballot in Denver, she let her choice be known, as well as the reasons for that choice. Her declaration of intent gave the membership the opportunity to question her decision and monitor for any sort of improper (or at least unseemly) quid pro quo. Judging from the final vote, and the fight over whether the session would be open or closed, I think Crystal's call for more transparency in the organization was refreshing and sought-after among many of the members who attended the meeting.

The interesting upshot of this dog and pony show was that the committee determined the rules in the YDA bylaws to be contradictory and vague on the matter of how YDA superdelegates should cast their ballot. As a result, the matter was referred to the Rules and Bylaws committee to take up at a later date, opening up the possibility that the charter could be amended and new precedents could be set for how YDA superdelegates act. Assuming that the Rules and Bylaws Committee takes this as a serious opportunity to more effectively shape the influence of young voters in the party, it's a prime opportunity to initiate one of the alternative superdelegate options I've advocated, including polling the YDA membership or linking YDA superdelgate votes to the popular youth vote (proportionally or winner-take-all).

I'm running out of time here. I'll post about the Campaign Committee meeting shortly.

So how much is the youth vote worth this year? Apparently $500,000 a pop if you are a superdelegate.

The Huffington Post is running a shocker of a piece claiming that Clinton donor Haim Saban offered the Young Democrats of America access to $1 million in funds if their two remaining superdelegates - David Hardt and Crystal Strait - endorsed Sen. Clinton:

One of Sen. Hillary Clinton's top financial supporters offered $1 million to the Young Democrats of America during a phone conversation in which he also pressed for the organization's two uncommitted superdelegates to endorse the New York Democrat, a high-ranking official with YDA told The Huffington Post.

Haim Saban, the billionaire entertainment magnate and longtime Clinton supporter, denied the allegation. But four independent sources said that just before the North Carolina and Indiana primaries, Saban called YDA President David Hardt and offered what was perceived as a lucrative proposal: $1 million would be made available for the group if Hardt and the organization's other uncommitted superdelegate backed Clinton.

YDA isn't answering anymore questions about this incident on the record, but if this is true, all I can say is "good for the Young Democrats!" for turning the offer down. At a time when Sen. Obama's campaign is threatening to defund 527 organizations (YDA is a 527), and many progressive youth organizations still struggle to raise their yearly budgets, YDA's leadership, this could not have been an easy choice for YDA leaders. $1 million is a substantial portion of YDA's yearly budget. This was the ultimate Faustian bargain dangled in front of them and they turned it down. They made the ethical choice to forgo what might be best for themselves politically and faithfully represent the will of their constituents in the nominating process.

It was even braver considering the potential fallout from other donors close to Saban:

Members of the Young Democrats agonized about the potential fallout of Saban's call; his financial offer represented one-third of the group's 2008 budget. Democratic officials and fundraisers were consulted about how to respond, and at times the discussions were "emotional," one participant said. "It is scary for them, Haim is very powerful, he has great influence over donors who give to them."

Another source said that Hardt and others were acutely aware of Saban's status within Democratic circles and were concerned that their organization would suffer long-term harm if they declined his offer or if news of the proposal became public.

It's a rather unfortunate dynamic in progressive politics that such donors have so much influence over the process, but that's how it works. Usually it's not even accurate to talk of donors, but rather "donor networks." If you piss-off the wrong donor, their network can be closed to you forever. So it was a gutsy move for YDA to snub a major donor like that. But I'm convinced it was the right move. Taking that money would have been disastrous for YDA in a number of ways -- not least in that endorsing Sen. Clinton over Obama would put the YDA leadership totally out of touch from the will of the surging youth vote, the very people they are supposed to represent. In terms of organizational branding and PR, it would most likely be taken as indicative of an organizational culture in which the leadership worked to protect and further their own political advancement at the expense of the membership. If YDA had taken the deal, those observations would have been right. Kudos to them for doing the right thing.

So where do YDA endorsements stand? Last week, Crystal Strait endorsed Sen. Obama. Her counterpart, Francisco Domenech, endorsed Clinton months ago. David Hardt, the President of YDA, and the person to whom the offer was allegedly made, has yet to endorse a candidate. Last week he released a statement indicating that he would wait until all votes were cast before making his endorsement.

By the by, this is yet another reason why I think my arguments for more transparency, and some basic guidelines, in how YDA and CDA superdelegates cast their ballots are called for and indeed long overdue.

David Hardt, President of YDA and the only YDA/CDA superdelegate to not yet endorse a candidate just released a statement:

STATEMENT BY SUPERDELEGATE DAVID HARDT, PRESIDENT OF THE YOUNG DEMOCRATS OF AMERICA

"We have seen unprecedented turnout among young voters this election cycle. A true Young Voter Revolution is underfoot. Nearly six million young people have participated in our primary process thus far. With just five contests left, I will wait to declare my superdelegate vote until every young voter has made their voice heard. The Young Democrats of America will proudly unite behind our nominee."

The Young Democrats of America (YDA) is the nation’s largest youth-led, partisan political organization with over 2,000 chapters in all 50 states.

Update: According to CNN, Crystal's endorsement ties the race for Superdelegates among Clinton and Obama. It would be great if the other YDA or CDA super delegates could be the ones to tip the balance in Obama's favor.

Hint, hint . . . .
-------------------------------------

Crystal Strait, the woman representative of YDA at the DNC - aka one of YDA's three superdelegates - has endorsed Sen. Obama. This press release just hit my inbox:

CALIFORNIA SUPERDELEGATE PLEDGES TO BARACK OBAMA

Young Democrats of America DNC Member Cites Obama's Ability to Bring Young People into the Process

CHICAGO, IL - Today, Young Democrats of America Board Member and Former California Young Democrats President Crystal Strait pledged to vote for Barack Obama for president. Strait is a superdelegate and Democratic National Committee Member from California. Strait is the 276th superdelegate to endorse Obama. Obama is 155 delegates away from securing the Democratic nomination.

Strait said, "While representing the Young Democrats of America at the DNC, my number one priority is to ensure that young people are fully represented at the polls and in the Party. Barack Obama has shown a real commitment to young voters in his campaign and in response young people have overwhelmingly voted and caucused for Obama in these primary contests. We know that if a young person votes three times in a row for a Party, they become a Party voter for life. We know that because of high youth turnout in 2004 and 2006, 2008 is the third and critical election for young voters. And that's why I know I want to pledge my delegate vote to Barack Obama."

###

The Young and College Democrats have 5 combined super delegate votes. So far the count stands at 1 and 1. Francisco Domenech, Crystal Strait's male counterpart at the DNC, declared his support for Sen. Clinton months ago.

Still to endorse: David Hardt, the President of YDA and both delegates from the College Democrats: Lauren Wolfe, the President of CDA, and Awais Khaleel, CDA's VP. Wolfe and Khaleel have posted a YouTube video asking young people how they should cast their ballots.

Update: Speaker Pelosi issued a statement at a press conference in support of the bill earlier today. And up in Alaska, Matt Browner-Hamlin informs me that Mark Begich, who is running against Sen. "Series of Tubes" Stevens, also came out in strong support of the bill.
-------------------------------

Rumor has it that Sen. Jim Webb's new GI Bill is likely come up for a vote in the next two weeks as part of the Iraq War supplemental, and a number of organizations are running campaigns in support. Most recently, YDA's Veterans Caucus started a petition in support of the bill. You can join their action here.

For those who haven't been following this, the new GI Bill would provide the following:

• Make benefits available to all members of the military who have served on active duty since 9/11/2001, including activated reservists and National Guard.
• Provide benefits for tuition, housing, and books for up to 36 months of education for Iraq and Afghanistan veterans.
• Link amount of benefits to amount of time served on active duty.
• Increase amount of time after leaving active duty to collect educational assistance to fifteen years compared to ten.
• Allows additional payments for tutorial assistance as well as licensure and certification tests.
• Create a new program in which the government will agree to match, dollar for dollar, any voluntary additional contributions to veterans from institutions whose tuition is more expensive than the maximum assistance provided.

The bill is opposed by John McCain, who has put forth his own, weaker version that would primarily benefit career officers at the expense of the enlisted force. Vote Vets is currently running a campaign to pressure Sen. McCain into supporting the Webb bill.

I'll post more about the bill's progress as I get it.