front page - editorial archives  - search - community

Commentary
	D.C. Dems needs to show up on Jan. 13 (Published December 1, 2003) By BILL MOSLEY

Earlier this year, the D.C. Council voted to make the city’s presidential primary the first in the nation – to be held on Jan. 13, two week’s before New Hampshire’s. Hosting the first primary, the reasoning went, would call nationwide attention to the District’s disenfranchisement and force the candidates to articulate how they would bring full democracy to the people of the nation’s capital.

Since then, developments have seemingly tarnished the idea. The D.C. Republican Party opted not to participate, and, more damaging, opposition from the national Democratic Party – which objected to the District’s moving ahead of New Hampshire – forced the D.C. party to make the primary non-binding. As a result, local delegates to the Democratic National Convention will be selected at a caucus on Feb. 10. The latest setback was the decision of five of the nine candidates for the Democratic nomination to skip the primary in response to pressure from the national party.

Does this mean that the initiative to hold the early primary was a mistake? Not at all.

First of all, the prime movers behind the primary – a coalition of local D.C.-democracy organizations and Councilman Jack Evans – are to be congratulated for innovative thinking. Too much of the campaign for full democratic rights for the District has consisted of introducing legislation and politely lobbying Capitol Hill, a less-than-effective strategy given the city’s lack of either a vote in Congress or a national movement that would force the federal government to listen to us. The primary idea was just the sort of outside-the-box thinking the democracy movement needs.

In terms of public education, the primary already has been a success. Scores of national and local media outlets have reported the story – from national media such as CNN and The Wall Street Journal to The Manchester (N.H.) Union Leader (the latter admittedly not a sympathetic outlet, but in this case there’s no such thing as bad publicity).

Even those candidates who are skipping the primary have been forced to address the District’s disenfranchisement, and all have issued statements on the issue. We also now know which candidates are willing to stand up for disenfranchised Americans – and which aren’t – based on who decided to participate. Howard Dean, Dennis Kucinich, Carol Moseley Braun and Al Sharpton, regardless of their views on other issues, can be counted as friends of the District. On the other hand, Wesley Clark, John Edwards, Richard Gephardt, John Kerry and Joseph Lieberman decided to knuckle under to the party rather than use this opportunity to address an injustice of two centuries’ duration.

So in terms of achieving the initiative’s main goals – forcing candidates to address the District’s disenfranchisement and generating publicity about our colonial status – the primary has already been a success. As for the primary being non-binding, what is more important – another meaningless springtime vote after the nomination has been determined, or an opportunity to educate the nation about disenfranchised residents of the nation’s capital?

There’s one more piece to the puzzle needed: D.C. Democrats need to show up at the polls on primary day. Those eager to call the election a failure would be stunned by a healthy turnout. So mark your calendars, set your alarms and get to the polls bright and early on Jan. 13.

***

Bill Mosley is a member of the Stand Up! for Democracy in D.C Coalition. Contact him at billmosley@starpower.net.

Copyright 2003, The Common Denominator