This came up in a different thread but with the event happening tomorrow (Thursday) night I thought it was worth creating its own discussion.
On Thursday, the Newton Democratic City Committee is sponsoring a forum featuring the candidates running for mayor who are registered Democrats…except that they aren’t.
Here’s from a comment posted earlier today from registered Democrat and candidate Eli Katzoff…
..I am registered as a Democrat and running as one, and have always voted Democrat.
One of the reasons I chose to run for mayor was that I felt it was important to step up and add a new young voice to this race and bring fresh ideas to the table. This is what the national Democratic party has been vigorously urging, especially since the 2016 election: that young people and those formerly outside the political system get involved.
Unfortunately, however, the Newton Democratic City Committee wrote me to inform me that I was not invited to participate in the Democratic mayoral forum on August 24 at City Hall with the other 3 Democratic candidates. The ostensible reason was that I didn’t formerly register as a Democrat until July. The July 1st date is an arbitrary date that was chosen retroactively and doesn’t exist as a requirement for running as a member of the Democratic Party or as mayor. Although I wrote them expressing my disappointment and dismay and asking them to reconsider, citing the importance of getting new young voices involved, they did not change their position.
I admire and respect the other 3 Democratic candidates and have nothing personal against them. However, it seems clear to me that the reason the city’s Democratic officials chose to exclude me was to limit participation to those candidates who until recently held public office, in this case as Newton City Councilors.
In this fraught political climate, the national Democratic Party has been putting out the call for more civic participation, more people to run for office, more young people to get involved in the electoral process and to vote, especially on the local level. The Newton Democratic party’s decision to exclude me (especially as the only Democratic candidate excluded) sends the opposite message: that new voices are not welcome; that holding political office is a pre-requisite to having a seat at the table; and that the Party officials, and not the voters, decide who the public should listen to.
This is unfortunately the wrong message, and is only going to discourage others like me from stepping up to participate in the future.
Eli Katzoff,
Mayoral Candidate
..I am registered as a Democrat and running as one, and have always voted Democrat.
I think Eli has proven that the signature requirement on nomination papers for Mayor is too low. My personal opinion is that he’s one of the least qualified candidates to run for mayor. Nevertheless, this is a very bad [and un-democratic] look for the Newton Democratic Committee. Eli raised the signatures, made the ballot, and he should be included.
Considering that the deadline to register as a candidate was July 25 it seems to me that would have been a good date for the City Dems to use as its cutoff.
It would be great to hear from someone on the committee’s leadership explaining this.
It’s a non-partisan election for Mayor. Let’s keep it that way.
As a member of the executive committee of the city Democratic committee, I voted to include Eli in the debate. It is always a tough debate between preventing candidates from registering as a Democrat after declaring for office to take advantage of our organizational infrastructure and encouraging more candidates who align with our values to officially become members of the party. I understand why others felt differently but I voted in favor of inclusivity.
Personally, I believe that anyone who registers as a Democrat should be able to introduce their platform and engage in a debate about ideas to try to convince our members that they are worth voting for.
Hello everyone,
Thank you for your interest in the NDCC pre-preliminary mayoral forum tomorrow evening, 7 pm, in the War Memorial Auditorium at City Hall. Hope you will come and participate. Questions can still be submitted on-line via the calendar entry on our website. Now, here’s more information than you probably wanted.
With regard to Candidate Eli Katzoff being excluded: yes, this was a decision of the NDCC Executive Committee on August 3. People were concerned he registered as a Dem in July after learning he had to do so in order to be included in NDCC events and communications. People also questioned his commitment to a real campaign which Eli has even said began as an attempt at humor. According to the statewide Democratic Party database, since 2008 Eli has voted only three times – presidential elections (’16, ’12 and ’08) – and he has not voted in any primaries or municipal elections.
Running for political office is serious business and the intent of our forum is to showcase three experienced candidates who have a reasonable history with the Democratic Party. While we can’t include Eli, he is clearly a talented, smart and committed guy and I hope he will continue to be involved like the scores of other newcomers we have welcomed in the last six months.
In terms of the practice of setting a deadline for when you have to be a Democrat to participate in official Democratic Party activities – this is common practice at the state and national level by both Democratic and Republican Party organizations. For example, to be elected on the ballot during a Presidential Primary to a Democratic ward committee seat, you need to be registered as a Democrat in November the year before the election.
Our forum is open to the public – people from anywhere, of any political persuasion may attend and ask questions.
In terms of the format for tomorrow night, please see below. We have been collecting questions on-line and likely have enough already to fill the time. Questions will also be collected from audience members that night as well.
Thursday, August 24, 7:00 pm
Newton City Hall – War Memorial Auditorium
Schedule:
7:00 pm – doors open
7:10 pm – event begins with NDCC announcements, collection of questions etc while people get seated
7:15 pm – opening speeches – up to 5 minutes each
7:30 pm to 8:15 pm – audience questions – up to 2 minutes per answer, 30 sec rebuttal if one candidate is named by another.
8:20 pm – closing statements, 2 minutes each
8:30 pm – event ends
Format for questions:
Questions will be solicited in advance of the forum.
Also, participants can submit questions on paper that evening.
Facilitators will sort and read the questions.
Similar questions will be grouped together.
Name of the individual(s) who asked the question will also be read.
Thank you for participating!
Just one additional reason to remain an independent unenrolled voter; the collective bias of a party on the decline premised on predisposed exclusionism and unaccepting of those who might think outside the ‘party line’..
I’ve reluctantly concluded that tonight’s debate at the War Memorial Auditorium should be a three candidate affair. The practical side of me feels that Amy, Ruth and Scott are the only three candidates that have any chance of making it to the November runoff and there is precious little time before now and September 12th to involve most of Newton’s electorate that is horribly disengaged from the local political process. Most people I talk with have little idea who these three candidates are, let alone the specifics of the Charter reform package they will be asked to vote on in November.
This is a Democratic Party sponsored debate so I think it’s natural they would be partial to those candidates that have given a lot of time and resources to the Party over many decades of public service. Amy, Ruth and Scott have certainly done so, while Eli has not. I’ve been a registered Democrat in Newton since 1958 and get concerned when it becomes fashionable to suggest that being a member of one of the two major political parties is somehow a suggestion of moral or intellectual decay, rather than what I feel it is for most of us; a strong indicator of civic involvement and concern.
That said, this is still a non-partisan election. The most important issues for me are ones that sometimes cross political and party lines here, so voting for every Democrat on the ballot would be impossible to begin with since almost every candidate running is a registered Democrat to begin with. Plus there are some non Democrats running who have ideas and positions I find interesting, productive and stimulating. I don’t think a serious look at any of them will do anything to undermine my Party’s chances in next year’s statewide and national contests where things are a lot more crystallized.
Shawn,
You’re saying that the dems have a litmus test for the debate?? If he voted in municipal elections or preliminaries you would have accepted him??
You’re willing to take Eli’s time, effort, money, vote….but not accept him on the debate??
Seems like names have changed, but just more of the same.
I thought you were the big tent party. I guess it’s the big tent party when it’s convenient for you.
Eli is a registered Democrat. He has always voted Democrat. He followed the Democratic rules to run for Mayor of his hometown. Yet notwithstanding the fact that he followed all the rules and is unambiguously a member of the Democratic Party, Eli’s local Democratic Party (the NDCC) took deliberate and affirmative action to silence his voice by prohibiting him from participating in a Democratic debate. In my opinion, this decision illustrates a much broader and fundamental problem.
In prohibiting a registered Democrat who followed all the rules from participating in a Democratic debate, Mr. Fitzgibbons claims “People were concerned he registered as a Dem in July after learning he had to do so in order to be included in NDCC events and communications.”
The (national) Democratic Party expressly states its belief that this country succeeds when everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same rules.
In Newton, evidently, these standards don’t apply. Look – all politicians join a political party to gain access to resources. Isn’t that in part the premise of having political parties to begin with? That Eli is being singled out and excluded from this debate based on nothing but speculation is both wrong and concerning for those of us who unconditionally believe in inclusivity.
Mr. Fitzgibbons further states that “People also questioned his commitment to a real campaign which Eli has even said began as an attempt at humor.” This belief is materially false as Eli never said he began his campaign as an attempt at humor. Rather, he said that he was using humor as a means to get his campaign going. That the NDCC misconstrues this distinction is a problem as it sends the message “you’re welcome to be part of our group, unless we decide we don’t like you.”
Furthermore, it sets a new standard that the NDCC is in the business of deciding whose campaign is “real” and whose isn’t. As someone who understands the importance of diversity and inclusion, I would strongly encourage the NDCC to reconsider setting such a standard and instead using established rules and procedures to make such decisions.
The irony in all this is that I’ve heard Eli is doing so well in debates that he’s gaining more support than anticipated. Given all of the aforementioned, Eli should be allowed to participate in tonight’s debate. Let’s move forward, not backwards.
paging Bernie Sanders for comment on what it’s like to have your own party chair impede your campaign.
NDCC changed it web site to read, “The Newton Dems invite all members of the public to join a forum and conversation with all candidates for Mayor of Newton who were registered to vote as Democrats before July of this year.”
Which of course Eli registered in July so the new rule of “before July” was created just to exclude him.
In other words, the NDCC Executive Committee got together on August 3rd and came up with a way to exclude him because “people” questioned his motives and commitment – not to mention his voting record. Not a good look, Newton Dems.
Hi everyone,
Eli’s perspective is valid and the points he and his supporters make are completely reasonable and well taken. These pro’s and con’s were discussed by our group and ultimately the decision was to limit his participation. A small group of people (such as Bryan and myself actually) voted to include Eli in our forum. However, the vast majority of meeting attendees – great people who are listed on our website and who are dedicated, smart and experienced activists – thought that it was not right to include him in this forum. We stand behind this decision.
For those questioning the NDCC I would ask–do you attend Ward Committee meetings? Do you join and participate in our proceedings which are open to the public? Our Executive Committee members will tell you that non members are often given the opportunity to speak and comment at our meetings. Like government, political party leaders can and should be influenced by the voices of grassroots activists. People need to show up, speak up, share opinions and participate.
Shawn
@Shawn: Can you tell us what the committee vote was?
The Democratic Party has been doing just what Eli said – encouraging a more diverse and younger population to run for local office. I’m proud to have been a Democrat since I turned 18 but I’m not pleased with the NDCC’s decision to exclude a registered Democrat from their forum – whatever the reason.
I also think it’s a shame that candidates outside of Newton’s political system are being treated as throw-aways. Even if they have a slim chance of winning, their ideas are important. Maybe in future years they will run again and we will already know more about them and their vision for Newton.
I do think it makes more sense for newcomers to political office to run for down ballot positions first.
Greg –
This from memory so may not be precise, but I want to say it was like 20 to 5 plus a few abstentions. The meeting had a good turnout though not everyone who could have voted was in attendance.
Shawn
So if you’re running for president and you’ve been outspokenly NOT a Democrat for your entire political career, it’s fine to change your party registration and run as a candidate no matter when you made that change, but the rules are different if you’re running for mayor?
If you are going to have such an exclusionary rule, it is absolutely wrong to set the deadline retroactively. I could have supported this ruling if the city Dems had a clearly stated rule that you had to register as a Dem by a certain date in order to be included in events such as this. But it is wrong to arbitrarily pick a cut-off date in order to exclude someone you don’t want.
Local dems AND the Newton Tab should be ashamed for shutting out other candidates. Not just Eli. The other 3 too are treated like jokes, not serious, not professional … never mind what they have to say about the issues. What if one of them wins, just like Trump was elected even though the media and RHINOS thought he was a joke.
How ironic that the NDCC is excluding Eli because they “were concerned he registered as a Dem in July after learning he had to do so in order to be included in NDCC events and communications.”
Two years ago they were practically extorting those us who were not registered Democrats — including Jim Cote! — to register as Democrats. Here’s an excerpt of an email they sent on October 17, 2015 (!), to all the non-Democrat candidates (me, Jake Auchinchloss, Lynne LeBlanc, Jim Cote, Cyrus Vaghar, Susan Huffman, Groot Gregory, someone named Campbell Risen – probably an area council candidate, Karen Manning, Megan Meirav, Tom Sheff, and Kathy Winters), entitled “Inviting you to join the Democratic Party”:
I called this the “protection letter” and I don’t pay protection, so I was not about to cave into this pressure.
The “current list” in their attachment was a list of Democrats in each race with checkmarks by their names, and no mention of Republican Jim Cote or independents like me. The implication was clear: join the party if you want your name on this list.
Behavior like this, now and two years ago, on the part of the NDCC is a complete turnoff to me, and a big reason why I don’t want to register as a Newton Democrat, even though my social liberal/fiscal conservative views are more aligned with national Democrats.
Dear Anonymous:
” What if one of them wins, just like Trump was elected even though the media and RHINOS thought he was a joke.”
Er, that would be RINOs (Republican In Name Only) not the really cool looking animal with horns on its nose. Trump was also consistently leading polls, which is why the national media paid so much attention to him during the primary campaign.
The TAB hasn’t “shut down” the four candidates you speak of : We have reported on each of their candidacies individually, have invited each to pen an OpEd column and plan to have an additional Q&A with all of them before Sept. 12.
That said, much of our coverage has focused on the three city councilors. It has been a difficult choice, one that takes into account the needs of our readers while trying to be fair to the “outsider” candidates.
Thank you Julia for having the courage to post that. I am a life long Democrat but it is the Hypocrisy of this Party – NDCC that is causing many of us to consider switching party’s.
The best Lesson that the NDCC could learn tonight is for all of the 3 invited Candidates to back out and for anyone considering going to watch to NOT show up.
The NDCC needs to learn how to REALLY BE WELCOMING. Not just pretend they are.
I was going to comment about the letter Julia posted, as one of the recipients of that “kind invitation”. With this recent incident I am happy I did not become associated with the NDCC. If this was a tweet I would include “SAD”.
Just a quick note that relates to comments in this post about Shawn Fitzgibbons and Bernie Sanders. It doesn’t surprise me that he was a dissenting voice in the decision to exclude Eli. I think an impression is being left that Shawn is trying to run a closed shop, but I don’t think that’s the case. I was one of Bernie’s earliest supporters and participated in a number of NDCC events on his behalf beginning in early 2015. All we had to introduce him were a few articles from the Nation and some hand drawn signs. Many long time Democratic party officials were not pleased to see us show up, but I will never forget how warmly accommodating Shawn was and how he did everything he could to make certain we had an equal place at every event the Newton party put on. It’s common knowledge that many put pressure on Shawn to support Hillary Clinton when it was assumed by everyone (including me) that she would be the nominee. He could have easily accepted the argument that Bernie isn’t a real Democrat, but he didn’t I’ll remain forever grateful to him for doing so. I know we have different slants on this year’s municipal election, but we’ll roll with the punches.
Folks, to be clear, the Democratic party is just that, democratic. This decision was made by our executive board collectively. Lets not attack Shawn personally when he was one of the few people that actually voted to include Eli in the debate.
Can someone tell us exactly what the vote was? Did the Newton Democrats vote to exclude Eli from the debate, or did they vote to set a policy that all Newton Democrats (including Eli and future Newton Democrats) who fail to register before a certain date are excluded from debates? The distinction between these two votes is important.
@Jeffrey – in this case, there was no distinction. They voted to create a deadline and make it retroactive in order to ensure that Katzoff would be excluded. I would have no complaint if they’d voted for it to be the rule going forward, or if they’d made and publicized this rule in advance so all candidates would know the deadline. But they didn’t.
I’m more interested in the fact that Eli has never voted in a municipal election. I don’t care what party he is, I think it’s curious he never even bothered to vote for the seat he is now supposedly so interested in filling.
@Emily – that would be a good question to ask him at a debate. Of course, he can’t be asked that at any he’s barred from participating in.
@ Emily, here is a quote from Tom Perez, the new National Democratic Party chair.
“We need to have a long-term millennial strategy because we’re not doing a good job now of making the case to millennials that they should become Democrats…. I want to make sure as a party we’re supporting them because the Democratic Party has not traditionally defined its role as helping to build that pipeline [of candidates]. I think that’s wrong.”
Also, at a unity rally last spring with DNC Chair Tom Perez, Bernie Sanders said: “Our job is to bring millions of people into the political process who today do not vote or do not participate in any way. Our job is to radically transform the Democratic Party.”
2016 without a question was a wake up call to tens of thousands of us that we needed to get involved. I think we can agree that in the past very few millennials have voted in local municipal elections. I personally feel that it is a good thing for the country that Tom Perez is recruiting people like me to run for local office.
Eli Katzoff,
Mayoral Candidate
@Emily, I think the real question is why is the NDCC making this information available now and slandering a fellow (D) running for mayor?
If you look at the Newton Dems web site it becomes painfully clear that Eli is identified as a (D) but not a (NDCC). It seems like because he didn’t join them and pay his dues, he’s being trashed. Apparently it’s really not enough to enroll D, you have to kiss the hand of the NDCC too.
http://newtondems.org/dems/city-election-guide
Further evidence that there are no petty jobs–only petty people.
@Emily: You’re better than this comment. Much better.
When Jess Barton ran for local office last cycle, she hadn’t voted for the specific role she was then running for. Not because she didn’t care about her community – the opposite is true as she’s more meaningfully involved in our community than the vast majority of politicians – but rather because she simply wasn’t inspired by Newton’s political climate. As you well know, Jess is tremendously distinguished and would have been second to none in terms of how well she would have served the City of Newton. Is she any less suspect in your eyes because she didn’t vote for the seat that she was then “supposedly interested” in filling?
I’d also add that this very same tactic was used against me when I ran for student body president of my law school. Before running, I had zero affiliation with the SBA. I hadn’t gone to any board meetings nor was I a part of any student organization. But I knew that its current leadership was terrible, and that to transform the student government into one that worked to meaningfully improve the lives of students would take me winning the title of president. So I decided to run against the status quo, and I won. And guess what? Despite my “supposed interest” and running a campaign that wasn’t considered “real” by the status quo, once I took over, the positive results spoke for themselves.
We increased funding into student concerns by 500%, into academic affairs by 225%, into sustainability by 200%, and into diversity and inclusion by 175%. We created meaningful initiatives such as hosting the first-ever Diversity and Inclusion Week in school history, the first-ever Mental Health Symposium for Boston law students and attorneys in Boston history, and the first-ever SBA Presidential Summit in Massachusetts history. The results of my leadership were real: For the first time in more than five decades (and as the only law school in Boston), tuition did not increase; a high percentage of 1L students were paired with invaluable and experienced mentors, and student money was invested into improving quality of life and outcomes for all students rather than into a small group of partygoers.
Needless to say, I’m disappointed to see the same train of thought being used against Eli. From my perspective at least, it does nothing to analyze his character or leadership ability.
I’d rather be inspired than disappointed. Let’s step up our game by focusing on what really matters. This whole thing – especially the reasoning given for why Eli was silenced – is ridiculous. Are we really not better than this?
@ Tom – NO they are NOT better than that. The Debate exclusion and Emily’s Comment proves that. As a Life Long Democrat it is really showing me why many of my friends have left the Democratic party and why I should seriously consider doing the same thing.
“Democrats never agree on anything, that’s why they’re Democrats. If they agreed with each other, they’d be Republicans.” –Will Rogers
Don’t do nothing, be independent driven by logic and the willingness to explore that which might be nonconforming to accepted practice. ‘Egoism and competition are, alas, stronger forces than public spirit and sense of duty.’ – Albert Einstein
The NDCC is the main reason why I was a lifelong democrat and I am no more a dem. I suspect I will return to the party once I move out of Newton.
When I ran for Mayor against Cohen I was still a democrat and ran into much worse. I worked with the NDCC on various projects, volunteered my time and money for them. During my campaign I tried to communicate with all 8 dem ward leaders and after phoning and emailing several times I did speak to 2 of the 8 ward leaders!! The other 6 refused to even speak to me. The 2 that I did speak with, I’ll leave their names out of it, right off the bat said regardless of what you have to say I am with Cohen. So much for open mindedness!! For all they knew I could have been much, much better than Cohen…they didn’t care. Even though I worked with them on NDCC, they started a rumor that I was a Republican (I think because I opposed a new NNHS…I wanted to spread the money around to all of the schools) and lastly, zero based budgeting was my big issue, they went around telling people (as if they knew) that zero based budgeting doesn’t work on a municipal budget. The next Mayor Zero based budgeted and found $5 mil in cost savings without effecting services. How many years went on that we spent all that money…how much money did we throw away. (I suspect tens of millions of dollars).
All this left a horrific taste in my mouth and realized how horrific this group is (Shawn withstanding, since he wasn’t active back then).
I align my comments with Julia, Joanne and Groot.
The people who vote in municipal elections are mostly already civic minded, older or have a particular issue they care about. Young single adults, and those with families, demanding careers and little free time rarely vote local but generally vote in national elections. Seems backwards to me but there it is.
Part of the Democratic strategy to win nationally is to attract more of these younger people to become involved locally both by voting and running for office. Because of this and other reasons a more diverse and younger population is beginning to participate in municipal government.
I hope Eli isn’t discouraged by his treatment by the NDCC mainly because I like how he’s handled himself in the forums. I’m hoping he will run for municipal office again, perhaps down ballot, but in the meantime I hope he gets involved in Newton in many other ways so he’s easily recognized when the moment to run comes again.
This reminds me of what we just saw play out at a national level.. For better or worse the RNC had a wide open primary with all their candidates duking it out while the DNC somehow only had two major candidates for an election with no incumbent (one if you don’t count Bernie). That didn’t end well for the DNC in the general for some reason…
Even if realistically there are only three candidates that have a shot it’s still a benefit to have everyone participate as the other candidates can challenge on issues or points where Fuller/Lennon/Sangiolo have the same opinion and force them to defend or differentiate themselves. Restricting participation to the candidates that have a chance or have “paid their dues” is great if you want an echo chamber but not as great if you want to find the strongest candidate.