Quote:
Originally Posted by Deuces McKracken
Wat???
The party has a ton of power. I am struggling to see what perspective you are taking here since you seem reasonable on other topics- some trivial distinction on the DNC against the democratic party? They are pretty much synonyms. And the party has a ton of power. They distribute ranks within governments.
Nah, the party itself doesn't have very much power - individual politicians, lobbyists and interest groups, political consultants, donors, voting blocs, etc they have power. But the actual party leaders themselves, the heads of the state parties, the DNC, etc. they have very little independent power in most states. The DNC and the Democratic Party are very much not synonymous. The Democratic party is actually fairly decentralized.
For instance, in New York the state party leadership is almost completely controlled by Governor Cuomo. It wasn't always this way. For instance,
back when patronage jobs were more plentiful, the party district leaders in NYC were more powerful than the elected State Assembly members. But the good government and the party reform movements killed most of the power of the party and transferred it primarilly to politicians.
Quote:
The democrats just stopped a single payer effort in California. How do you think that happened? By powerful people getting together and deciding who was going to be the speaker (who blocked it) - not by any democratic means.
If it was up for a vote it would have passed.
First, tabling the bill is democratic. Representative democracy is a form of democracy, and that is within the normal rules of representative democracy. It is also not undemocratic for the duly elected representatives to
oppose the majority view of their constituents. Their job is to represent the interests of their constituents (or the state as a whole). People are often wrong about what is actually in their interest, and a representative can oppose their opinion in those cases. If their constituents are unhappy with that opposition, vote them out of office.
Second, it isn't the Democratic party that is stopping the single payer effort in California, it is California's direct democracy system.
Prop 98 requires that 50% of the state budget go to K-12 and community colleges - which isn't realistically compatible with the amount of money that would be needed to fund single payer. So if California's voters want single payer, they have to first vote to change the constitution to allow this to happen.
EDIT: There are of course still remnants of strong party leadership in NY, and I assume in other states as well - eg the county leaders in the Bronx and Queens are still quite powerful, controlling many of the state rep seats. And civil and state supreme judges are still primarily appointed either by party district leaders, the clubs, or party leaders. But the party doesn't have much impact beyond the entry-level elected positions like city council or state assembly.
Last edited by Original Position; 07-11-2017 at 03:02 AM.
Reason: added text