Young Voter PAC

On the Op-Ed page today, the New York Times is running a surprisingly information-free look back at "what went wrong" with the Clinton campaign. How bad is it? Apparently, Clinton lost because she is too much like Hermione Granger. Seriously. How bad is it? So bad that Mark Penn and Michael Kinsley offer the best of slim pickings. There was one bright light though.

Buried in the 10th paragraph of an 11 graph piece (the most column inches of any contributor), in which he argues that it's not his fault, Mark Penn says this:

Are there a lot of other things the campaign could have done differently? Of course. We should have taken on Mr. Obama more directly and much earlier, and we needed a different kind of operation to win caucuses and to retain the support of superdelegates. From more aggressively courting young people earlier to mobilizing the full power of women, there are things that could have been done differently.

Emphasis is mine. This is a far cry from Mark Penn at the Iowa Jefferson-Jackson dinner:

At least two of Hillary Clinton’s upper-echelon advisers, Mandy Grunwald and Mark Penn, were decidedly unimpressed .

“Our people look like caucus-goers,” Grunwald said, “and his people look like they are 18. Penn said they look like Facebook.”

Penn added, “Only a few of their people look like they could vote in any state.”

While the importance of young voters as a Democratic constituency is far from the only lesson to be gleaned from this primary campaign, it is an important one. Young Voters in Iowa were subjected to major outreach from the Obama campaign and from outside partisan and nonpartisan organizations including (but not limited to) the Young Voter PAC, Rock the Vote, the Young Democrats, and the Student PIRGs. As a result, they overperformed their share of the electorate and came out in equal numbers to the "reliable" senior demographic. That was the beginning of the end for Clinton.

Here's to hoping that other Democratic candidates down the ballot learn that lesson. And here's to hoping that they know that there are many resources available to their campaigns to help learn how to reach that audience. From live-blogging here at Future Majority, to working with organizations like Young Voter PAC and Rock the Vote, or local youth orgs that may be organizing in their state. Reaching young voters is not rocket science, and there are many folks willing to help you do it.

We all know the importance of targeting and engaging young voters. In addition to well-established approaches – you know, like actually talking to young voters about issues we care about and using peer-to-peer outreach to do that – we have seen a number of successful non-traditional outreach methods. One of those tools is community service.

Young people volunteer for community service at much higher rates than they volunteer for traditional political activities. There is a culture of service in the Millennial generation that is rooted in the belief that community service is an effective way to solve important issues, locally and nationally. Our friends at Democrats Work are harnessing that passion for service and linking it to politics.

As many of you know, Democrats Work connects grassroots Democrats to community service projects. Through this service-based approach, Democrats Work is moving politics onto the turf of young voters, making community service an integral part of political activism. Their latest efforts to build the “politics of service” movement is an innovative contest with General Wesley Clark.

The “Serve with the General" contest will send General Clark to a competitive Congressional district to do a Democrats Work community service event helping returned veterans, painting a public school that needs it, supporting our troops, cleaning up a neglected part of town. We have a chance to send Clark to a district where a youth-friendly candidate is running for Congress.

You can vote to send General Clark to a Congressional district where the candidates are already making young voters a priority. I want to point out a few: Darcy Burner (WA-08), Bob Lord (AZ-03), Ashwin Madia (MN-06 MN-03), Gary Peters (MI-09), Dan Seals (IL-10), and Gary Trauner (WY-AL).

Take a look at these districts when deciding where to send General Clark. You can cast your vote here: www.democratswork.org.

P.S. We hope to have a candidate or two here in the next few days talking about how his or her campaign is targeting young voters. Stay tuned.

Jane Fleming Kleeb is the Executive Director of the Young Voter PAC which helps Democratic candidates and State Parties win with the 18-35 year-old vote through endorsements, on-the-ground support, training, strategy and money. She is a regular on Fox and is part of MTV’s Street Team ‘08 representing Nebraska. She is married to Democratic candidate for US Senate Scott Kleeb.

The Young Voter PAC has put together a resource guide for young people looking to run as delegates to the convention. A valuable resource for those struggling to navigate the process, especially amid all the cuts by the campaigns.

Navigating the Last Stages of the Delegate Process:
A resources guide from the Young Voter PAC and Young Super Delegates

The Young Voter PAC and Young Super Delegates want all young people to be able to run in their state’s delegate races. While we understand the rules affirm campaigns can cut their lists to the minimum amount required by the rules (which we post below), we still believe it is critical, in order to continue to build the Democratic Party and secure the youth voting bloc, that young people be given the opportunity to run and that young people be considered for “At-Large” or “PLEO” delegate spots.

Since this is the first time so many young people are running as delegates, making sure young people know the rules so they have the best possible shot at getting elected to represent their candidates as a delegate in an important role for everyone involved in the Democratic family.

There are some things you can do as a young person in order to get elected in your state to be a “pledged delegate” for your candidates of choice in Denver, CO at the DNC’s National Convention.

It should be noted, that we are talking about pledged delegates. There is no room (this time around) for you to become an “unpledged delegate” at this point in the process because those slots are given to your State Party leaders, state DNC Members, Democratic Congressional Members and Distinguished Party leaders. But, if you are looking ahead to 4 years from now—you can and should try to become a DNC member in your state.

If you have any questions, please email info@youngvoterpac.org or visit www.youngvoterpac.org.

General Tip

Get known by all the decision makers and opinion leaders. Being known is critical. Do NOT be humble in this process. Create a Facebook or MySpace page making the case for your delegate status, talk to the campaign, write letters to your DNC members especially the Chair (and share a copy of the letter in the resources section), write letters to your elected officials…reach out to folks and make the case.

If You Were Cut or Think You Might be Cut

If your state has NOT gone through the “cutting” process yet, now is the time to make your case to opinion leaders (e.g. vocal youth voting advocates in your state, young staff at the State Party level who might be able to help you make the case, young elected officials, etc.) as well—and most important-- as the campaign you are supporting that you are one of the best people to represent the candidate as well as young people. You should locate the Regional or State Director of the campaign you want to serve as a delegate for and reach out to that person.

State Party staff does NOT decide who or if someone is cut, that is a decision by the campaign. State The reality is, often times the “cutting” process is staff in a room looking at the list and doing their best to figure out who their top supporters are—and since this is often young people’s first time running as a delegate, the staff might not know who you are, so you have to make that happen.

If you state has gone through the “cutting” process and you got the rejection email, now is the time start to Plan B. If you happen to be a young elected official or a Party leader, you might be able to get to serve as a delegate in the role of a “PLEO” which means you are in the category of "Party Leaders and Elected Officials." Even if you are not an elected official or Party leader, the DNC’s Youth Council and the Association of State Party Chairs, Mike Brewer, sent a letter to all State Party Chairs encouraging them to appoint young people as PLEOs, so you can and definitely should, try that strategy in order to become a delegate.

Otherwise, you could also try to get one of the “At-Large” delegate slots that your Party has control over. These are positions that go to people for various reasons—some to reach diversity goals, some to reach gender balance, and there is no reason you can’t make the case to your State Party that young people are critical this election cycle and that you want to serve as a leader in the Party to help secure that voting bloc.

Other Resources

The Democratic National Convention Committee has a great resource up that walks you through the process of becoming a delegate, the definition of the various types of delegates and an interactive map of your state that shows the number of delegates pledge and unpledged your state is allotted.

The DNC’s Youth Council and the Association of State Parties sent a letter (pdf) to each State Party Chair encouraging them to appoint young people as PLEOs, use this letter to help make your case for a PLEO delegate spot.

The DNC’s Youth Council is holding conference calls to help people navigate the process in your state, check out their Facebook page to see when one is happening in your state.

Jane Fleming Kleeb wrote a piece on MTV’s chooseorlose.com site that she tailored for her state. You can take her blog post and simply edit the state section and post on your blog or Facebook or MySpace page.

Delegate Selection Rules

The full document of rules is on the Democratic National Convention Committee’s website. Below are a few pertinent rules.

According to Rule 12.D in the 2008 Delegate Selection Rules for the Democratic National Convention, state parties are required to supply to each presidential candidate a list of all persons who have filed for a delegate or alternate position pledged to that candidate. Candidates and their campaigns have the right to remove from the list those individuals that are not considered bona fide supporters of that candidate.

According to Rule 12.E, those individuals that have been removed from the list of bona fide supporters are not at all eligible to run for a position as delegate or alternate.

According to Rule.12.E(1), presidential candidates may only remove individuals from the list of bona fide supporters if at a minimum, there will be three (3) names for every one position in which that presidential candidate is entitled.

According to Rule.12.E(2), presidential candidates, in consultation with the state party, may remove any candidate for at-large and pledged party leader and elected official delegate or alternate position if at a minimum, one (1) name remains for every delegate position that candidate is entitled.

According to Regulation 4.23.A, when removing bona fide supporters, presidential candidates shall use their best efforts to make sure that delegate candidates meet the equal division goals and the affirmative action goals.

According to Regulation 4.23.C, delegate candidates removed from the list of bona fide supporters by a presidential candidate may file to run for another level as delegate, such as PLEO or at-large, and may also pledge to another candidate.

Each State Party Democratic Chair is required to certify to the Co-Chairs of the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee that each presidential candidate used their best efforts to ensure that their district-level delegate candidates meet the affirmative action and inclusion goals of the Affirmative Action plan for each state.

Many of you might already know about this - or at least some of it - but the last five days have seen something of an uproar in the youth community as young political activists and candidate supporters found themselves cut out of the state-level Democratic National Convention delegate selection process, first in California, and now apparently in other states as well.

I've refrained from commenting on it as youth advocates worked behind the scenes to rectify the situation, but now I think it's time to present a summary of what has happened, what is at issue, and where we stand.

What Happened
Young people running for delegate positions on behalf of their candidate at the Democratic National Convention in California were informed earlier this week that they had been cut from the process. This happened within both the Clinton and Obama campaigns, but the issue became particularly focused on the actions of the Obama campaign, which cut far more potential delegates and which relied heavily on young voters to secure victory in the primary contests held thus far.

To be clear, it is within the rights of the campaigns to make these cuts. I believe the technical term is that the campaigns are exercising their "right of refusal." Campaigns are granted this right in order to ensure that those delegates attending the convention are indeed hard core supporters of their candidate.

The Issues:

Nevertheless, this was problematic for several reasons:

• First, the criteria for being cut was (and continues to be) non-transparent and arbitrary. The campaign stated that it's purpose was to weed out potential Clinton supporters or all but the most hard-core Obama supporters, but a quick glance at the names of some of the youth who were cut put the lie to that claim rather quickly. Many were not only leaders in youth organizing, but solid Obama supporters as well. A second explanation that the campaign was concerned with the logistics of the nominating process and the sheer number of applicants was more reasonable, if still less than satisfactory.
• Second, the cuts showed a startling lack of recognition for the support that young voters gave to the Senator in his many victories and reinforced the worst tendencies of the Democratic Party in discouraging young people from participating within the party structure as a vehicle for change.
• Third, the move undercut the work of many youth groups, including the DNC Youth Council, which has actively run a campaign to encourage young people to run for delegate slots to the convention within their states.
• Fourth, and perhaps most importantly, the Obama campaign made promises to a number of youth leaders that the right of refusal would not be exercised against young supporters.

There is also another angle to this as well, having less to do with the Obama campaign than with how the DNC treats young people at the state and national level.

In 2006, the Young Democrats fought the DNC over affirmative action language in the DNC charter and mandatory goals for young people in each state delegation to the convention. You can read a write-up of that fight here, but in short it boiled down to this. YDA claimed that language in the DNC charter requires mandatory affirmative action goals for youth in each state delegation. The language in the charter mandates that young people be represented within the state delegations commensurate with the level at which they participated in the prior election (eg, if youth were 15% of a state's Democratic electorate in 2004, they should make up 15% of a state's delegation to the convention in 2008).

The DNC claimed that a rule issued at a later convention made those goals advisory/voluntary, and elected to ignore the language in the charter, which should supercede any committee rule. This has resulted in a hodge-podge or commitments/goals for youth delegates at the state level. Some states like California do have mandatory goals for youth in their delegation. Other's don't, creating the chance for young people to be underrepresented at the convetntion. And here's the rub. Whether states do or don't have mandatory affirmative action goals for youth, striking young people from the delegate lists can exacerbate the problem of unequal and nondemocratic representation for young people at the convention.

If too many young people are struck, it can make it difficult for the state party to meet its targets for youth delegates. The only way for the party to overcome that deficit is to use PLEO (Party Leader and Elected Official) and at-large delegate slots. Youth, particularly unconnected party activits, tend to get screwed over in this situation. Young people are are not, for the most part, Party Leaders or Elected Officials (though the latter is changing). And at-large delegate slots are more likely to go to the children of party leaders or donors than to Joe Activist who put in 1000 hours on the campaign trail.

On multiple levels, the system weeds out young people, particularly unconnected young people. The Obama campaign potentially made that situation worse by cutting so many young people from the prospective delegate pool.

Resolution?
Late last week, these concerns were all made known to the campaign privately by youth leaders, and publicly by Young Voter PAC , which released a statement echoing the concerns listed above. Not long after, the campaign relented and agreed to reinstate the cut youth candidates in California. At the time, they issued this statement:

There has been an extraordinary outpouring of grassroots support for Senator Obama among Democrats and Independents in all 53 California Congressional districts.

In recognition of this tremendous enthusiasm, our campaign has asked the California Democratic Party to allow all persons who have filed to be a district delegate candidate for Senator Obama at the Democratic National Convention to participate in the caucuses this Sunday, April 13, 2008.

We are confident that delegates elected from this pool will reflect the Senator's commitment to a diverse and unified delegation at the National Convention.

An overwhelming number of supporters have signed up to run for delegate, so there will likely be lines and tight space at the caucus locations. We ask for everyone's patience and cooperation.

Most of all, please enjoy this opportunity to meet other Obama supporters and elect delegate candidates to the Convention in Denver.

David Plouffe
Campaign Manager

The statement was bizarre in that it seemed to lay blame for the situation at the feet of the California Democratic Party, but it was a welcome move by the Obama campaign to rectify the situation, and it was applauded by the youth vote community. Unfortunately, it didn't end there. On Saturday, Kevin Bondelli, the YDA Southwest Regional Director, received this letter from the Obama campaign:

Dear Kevin Bondelli:

Thank you very much for applying to be an Obama At Large Delegate to the Democratic National Convention. When we started this campaign, we knew that our only path to victory was to inspire grassroots activism across our state, and we know you have made that possible. We are thrilled to have so much interest among Arizonans to represent the Obama campaign in Denver.

In compliance with the rules of the DNC, the campaign has opted to limit the list of candidates that have filed to run as an at-large delegate. The campaign understands the desire of all of our supporters to participate in this process, but to fully achieve the DNC’s goals of a diverse pool of delegates, and to accommodate the time this selection process will take, we have trimmed the list. Please know that we value every single Obama supporter and all of the hard work and energy that you have shown in working to make Senator Obama the Democratic nominee.

Our campaign understands and appreciates all of your tireless enthusiasm and commitment to Senator Obama. We thank you for your time and efforts on behalf of our campaign and we look forward to working with you in the upcoming months to elect Senator Barack Obama as President of the United States.

Sincerely,
(Staffer Name)

Kevin was gunning for one of those at-large delegate positions, different from those which were cut in California, but the letter raised the prospect that the campaign's reinstatement of youth delegates in California was not being replicated in other states. Which is where we are now.

Kevin wrote an open letter to the Obama campaign and the DNC in response to these cuts. He's knee-deep in this situation, as a rejected at-large delegate from Arizona, and he's been doing a play-by-play of his own situation as it unfolds.

To my knowledge, the Obama campaign has yet to issue a statement about the process and the status of youth delegates in other states. The DNC Youth Council is working to put together a guide for potential youth delegates to help maximize their chances of navigating the selection (and right of refusal) process. That guide should be ready later today pending DNC approval, and I will post it here after it is approved for distribution.

Today is Super Tuesday, but it is also Fat Tuesday, the peak of Mardi Gras. Fully cognizant of the fact that these should not at all conflict, the folks at Living Liberally, Young Voter PAC, Forward Montana, New Era Colorado, Democrats Work, and Traction are throwing election watching parties all over the country tonight.

From the Super Fat Tuesday website:

Super Fat Tuesday. Because election day should be celebrated. Because people want to experience politics together. Because New Orleans needs to be remembered. Because these campaigns have been so excessive, they are super fat...

So far there are over 27 parties scheduled in 19 states.

As for myself, this morning I schlepped over to the Municipal building in Downtown Brooklyn and cast my ballot for Sen. Obama. Tonight I'll probably stop by the Drinking Liberally party at the Tank in lower Manhattan before heading home to cover the results late into the night. Maybe I'll see some of you there.

Throughout the day I'm going to try to do short interviews with a number of youth vote folks working in Iowa to see what they're doing and what their expectations are for the evening. Here's the first with Jane Kleeb of Young Voter PAC.

Forty-eight more hours and this story continues to grow. First a summary of where we've been for those just coming to this. If you've been following along all week, you can skip down to the next section.

On November 30th, Iowa columnist David Yepsen published a blog called "The Illinois Caucus," decrying the Obama campaigns attempt to organize Iowa students originally from out of state to participate in the caucus. This was very quickly followed by statements from the Clinton and Dodd campaigns, also attacking Obama and/or casting doubt on the legitimacy of student participation. After some pushback from bloggers and youth organizers, Clinton and Dodd issued retractions of their statements, while Yepsen kept hammering away on the issue. In general, there was dissatisfaction with those retractions, which many organizers felt did not go far enough. This was confirmed when Bill Clinton made some ambiguous statements about student participation on the stump, deploying an extra-legal standard by asking students to "vote their conscience" and only participate if they felt Iowa was their true home. Coverage in the blogs heated up with front-page posts on both Open Left and Daily Kos. At the same time, Richardson and Biden both issued statements questioning the voting rights of students with dishonest arguments equating students with out-of-state campaign staffers.

Next, reaction from the mainstream media and youth organizations started to kick in. First the Young Democrats and Rock the Vote issued statements on the matter, and then the Iowa Student PIRG weighed-in, with over 20 student leaders backing a statement affirming the rights of students to caucus. As those statements came out, the issue started to appear in the mainstream media, particularly in the New York Post, Salon.com, Newsweek, The Politico, and Time. Mostly these stories pushed back against Yepsen, though a few like that in Time and the New York Post took Yepsen's frame. As these stories began trickling out, the Clinton and Dodd campaign issued new statements clarifying their position, again in support of student caucusing.

Which brings us to the last two days.

Yesterday youth groups kicked it up a notch. The Young Democrats took the fight to Yepsen, buying a full-page ad in his paper the Des Moines Register, as well as taking out an ad-buy on Facebook targeted at Iowa students. The Young Democrats have also created a website, www.youcancaucus.com, for students confused about the issue, and have already sent out emails to their entire list on the issue.

The Young Voter PAC has taken a two-pronged approach to the issue. They've had a FaceBook group up and running for days, and are currently raising money to help students who want to return to caucus find travel and find lodging (throw them $20 if you can spare it). The group has also been working behind the scenes to get the caniddates to clarify/retract their statements. Young Voter PAC released a press release late last night reporting on those efforts. Out of all the credible candidates (or those who have made previous statements on this issue), only Joe Biden has yet to declare support for student voting rights:

Hillary Clinton: “Hillary wants every student who lives in Iowa and wants to caucus in Iowa and is eligible to caucus in Iowa to do so. We hope that they will and we hope that they will caucus for Hillary. The Iowa caucus is special because it is based on Iowa values. We hope and trust that every campaign is making sure that potential caucus goers have all the information they need, and in no way explicitly or implicitly encourages anyone to break the law by participating in two places. Not only is it okay to engage students in Iowa, but it is critical to ensure that they are active participants in the process, and we are doing everything we can to get them out to caucus.” –Howard Wolfson, Communications Director

Chris Dodd: “Clearly students who are eligible can vote under the law and of course we welcome the participation of Iowa students in the caucuses” – Hari Sevugan, Communications Director

John Edwards: “The Democratic Party has set clear rules on who can caucus and all the campaigns should follow those rules. Students who move here for college and are properly registered have always been able to caucus.” – Dan Leistikow, Iowa Communications Director

Barack Obama: “Barack Obama doesn’t believe that we should disenfranchise Iowans who meet all the requirements for caucus participation simply because they’re in college. We should be encouraging young people to participate in the political process — not looking for ways to shut them out.” – Jen Psaki, Campaign Spokeswoman

Bill Richardson: “Governor Bill Richardson looks forward to students caucusing for him on January 3rd. He believes that the caucus process is an excellent opportunity for young voters, and he encourages all students who are eligible to participate and experience the excitement of the first-in-the-nation caucus.” – Roberts Becker, Iowa State Director

We've also seen more media coverage. I had previously thought that the media coverage on this might have peaked, but today the New York Times published an excellent editorial that came out strong for college students.

Student are rightly up in arms about these statements. The law in Iowa is crystal clear: students who attend school in the state are entitled to register to vote in the state as long they are not registered anywhere else. The two parties’ rules say registered voters may participate in caucuses in the precincts where they are registered. Students have the same right to do so as any other Iowan. But statements challenging their right to vote may intimidate some students into staying home.

Hammered by student groups, the candidates have reframed their statements. But the episode has left a bad taste in the mouths of many students and of the groups that have been working feverishly to bring more of them into the electoral process. Anything that undermines student voting is bad for politics and bad for the nation.

While I agree that this really has left a bad taste in the mouths of youth organizers, I've also been incredibly heartened by this event. Over the past two weeks, we've seen a number of things. We've seen progressive bloggers and youth organizers working together on an issue - something that rarely happens. We've seen youth organizations really coalesce around an issue and support each other. The result is that what would normally have been a blip on the media radar - a few panders to Iowa nativists at the expense of students - has blown up into a national issue in the paper of record. Not only that, but we won on the issue. Big time. Every campaign except for Biden retracted their comments, and the Edwards campaign - which was totally above this fray - weighed in as well.

The other reason I'm heartened is that this issue - while we've won it now, and it's something of a shame that we had to fight it within our own party - is going to resurface. As I've noted before, this is typically a Republican tactic, and they are sure to use it come the fall. In swing states across the country (including Iowa), Republicans are not going to want students to register and vote where they attend school. They'll talk about "taxpaying citizens" and legal residency requirements, in-state vs. out-of-state tuition, and we'll have to fight this battle all over again, just as we did in 2004. This was practice for that battle, and we've already laid the groundwork to get the media and the state parties on our side in this battle. We've slapped down all those arguments (even though the Supreme Court had already done so in 1979) and preemptively reframed this as a voting rights issue. That will be useful in the general election. Really, kudos all around on this one to everyone who contributed and continues to contribute.

I've got a bit of exciting site news. Mark spilled the beans in the comments yesterday, but if you haven't yet heard, I've accepted a spot as a weekend front-page writer for MyDD. That means that I'll be posting less here on the weekends, or what I write will first get posted to MyDD, and then reposted here a short while later.

This does not mean that Future Majority will not have content on the weekends.

AliceCheshireCat will still be blogging, along with Alex UA, and Josh Gorman will soon be back from hiatus to write on the weekends. And I'll be here blogging everyday during the week. This could mean a lot more traffic for Future Majority, and I hope y'all are as excited as I am about it. My first post will be tomorrow, I'll let y'all know when it goes live.

Now for some news:

• Hillary has launched her first youth outreach program - Club 44. It's aimed at young woman - one of the primary constituencies of Hillary's campaign to date (Women for Hillary is the only affinity group prominently displayed on her campaign website).
• The Young Democrats are ridiculing the latest temper tantrum thrown by their counterparts at YAF.
• Young Voter PAC is holding a fundraiser next week. They support candidates friendly to young voters. You should support them. Plus there's an open bar . . .