our ailing parties

Our Ailing Parties Membership selects precinct committeemen but is excluded from the election of important officers.

By RICHARD s. cHlILDs*

ACK in 1894 when the National B Municipal League was founded, its target was the local branches of the national political parties whose arrogant political machines and bosses ruled and robbed our cities. Each machine constituted a second mu&- ipal goverment, obscured but mal- odorous, which nominated almost in- vincible tickets, dictated appointments and distributed franchises worth millions to its financial supporters. It manned and rewarded its district and precinct party officers and workers out of the municipal treasury by pa- tronage and provided from the same source charity to the immigrant poor whose adhesion it attracted by methods unavailable to volunteer, clean-handed reformers.

The century-old progress of civil service reform has now undermined most of that and so has the National Municipal League with its tenet of nonpartisan local elections. Below the metropolitan cities nonpartisan elections are held in two-thirds of Amer- ican cities plus further similar condi- tions in the one-party cities of the south. The recent head of the domi- nant party in a New York City borough lamented inability to find

* Mr, Childs is honorary chairman of the National Muniapal League’s Executive Committee and a full-time volunteer on the staff. He is author of Civic Vic tonk- The Story of an Unfinished Revolution (1952), The First 50 Ymrs of the Council- Manager Plan of Municipal Government (1965), and many artides on Citizen action and state and local government.

election district captains (precinct committeemen) who wilI really work for the party. There is no way of paying them. Democratic and Repub- lican machines in typical cities, silent in municipal elections, remain in rela- tively emaciated form for county, state and national elections. In statewide and national elections,

however, parties continue to be important and inevitable. They have work to do but their officers wail that they can no longer recruit and muster €or battle a loyal and diligent rank-and-file of party workers. They call it by an old word-apathy. It is certain that nowadays the parties in their remaining political terrai- county, judicial district, state and national-fail to attract to their inner councils any considerable percentage of the party membership. Millions turn out in support of each party on election day but they don’t participate in the scrutiny and selection of their respective internal party officers; less than 3 percent of the party vote participates in the internal procedures of each party.

Why not more? Because they can’t get in. In 48 of &he 100 state parties (two

in cach state) the only party offices submitted to selection by the membership are the precinct committeeman and committeewoman; every- thing else is pyramided on that frail layer. In other parties additional delegates and officers are elective in

2 98

19701 OUR AILING PARTIES 299

primaries or caucuses without much improving that situation inasmuch as the posts are numerous, ephemeral, fractional and trivial. The party posts of prime importance, the county chairman for instance, are always shel- tered behind indirect election procedures and obscurity.

To get at such intra-party char- acters you can only go out to capture the posts of precinct committeemen, take on their duties of getting out the party vote, and attend county conventions in which you will commonly be expected to be a docile ex officio member. Gathering at such conventions from numerous precincts and organizations in numbers sufficient to displace the county chairman takes some doing. It can be done by long- term factionalism, but such corrective insurgency is not game for volunteers in spasmodic efforts. Forty precincts perhaps, each with its 300 votes of which, say, each party musters 100, is a separate little battleground where insurgency must find and instruct its friends in a separate project for change. That’s too difficult. Hence stagnation miscalled apathy.

* * * The Citizens Union of New York

City, in a 1951 report entitled Party Organization in New York City put its finger on this complex. Perception of the effect of the old tanglefoot party organizations was helped by the fact that New York was an ex- aggerated case. A 27-member committee exhibited the preposterous contraptions of party organization. They found that great numbers of “county committeemen” were elected in groups by precincts (called election districts) and were supposedly

clustered geographically in conventions to elect their election district captains, the executive committees and the district leaders. The rules called for a minimum of two county committeemen from each election district, of which there were 1,016 in Manhattan. But the party manage- ments were ostensibly generous in sharing power, and at that time the number of Manhattan Democratic county committeemen was 11,955. The report related:

Alfred E. Smith once said that “the membership is kept at a large figure in- tentionally in order to bring as many of the voters as possible into prominence in party affairs.” The result, however, is almost complete anonymity, impo- tence and lack of responsibility for the individual members. Meetings are held, often at considerable expense, in large auditoriums like those in Manhattan Center and Lost Battalion Hall, which still could not hold the members if they all tried to attend. I t was pointed out in the recent court case over the meeting place for nomination of a Manhat- tan Democratic member of the Board of Elections that the only hall in Man- hattan adequate to hold all the members of the “committee” is Madison Square Garden and the cost of a meeting there is $5,000. I t was pointed out that only about 800 of the 11,955 members usually attend. Similarly in other parties and other boroughs only a small part of those qualified actually attend to carry out the formalities of a care- fully planned agenda unless there is some unusual excitement. On Ithe rare occasions when there is a contest against the plans of the inner circle, the possibilities of suppression of the real popular verdict through packing of the hall, disorder, faiIing to recognize any but the “right” people, inaccurate counts and otherwise are obvious.

The extreme of unwieldiness and Iack of real democracy is realized on those occasions when the five county commit-

3 00 NATIONAL CIVIC REVIEW [June

tees of a party have to meet together. When a successor to Mayor O’Dwyer had to be so nominated by the Demo- cratic party in September 1950 (the vacancy having come too late for a primary), 38.086 county committeemen were qualified to participate in the selection! Actually about 9.000 did gather in Madison Square Garden for the purpose. This was a huge number, but less than one-quarter of those elected to exercise the power. The Republican counterpart met in Town Hall for the same purpose, with about 2.000 out of an eligible 13,000 participating.

The committee proposed discarding the county committees and their fan- tastic sectional conventions for elect- ing district leaders. These conventions were sometimes held in the street. Others were in halls presided over by chairmen who recognized only persons listed in a prearranged libretto. Dissent was often unrecog- nized, no matter how vociferous. Direct election of the district leaders in primaries was the obvious answer and was adopted with results described in a later article. These leaders were well known and important, and extensive participation by voters followed when they were ex- posed to direct election. Renovation became possible and promptly ensued.

In 1968 the League of Women Voters took a look a t similar realities throughout the country. It exhorted its state and local chapters to en- courage their members (but not their officers) to embark on “Party Pre- cinct Participation-in the party of your choice.” I t was recognized as a \vise and perceptive suggestion. The niessage was well pointed and state and local LWV bulletins blossomed out with localized adaptations and information.

The state leagues looked up the local laws and customs and published the data to their members, frankly and correctly assuming that, for most of them, ‘<Party Precinct Participa- tion” would be their first experience. In 35 of the 100 parties it meant nothing more than a personal appear- ance once in two years at obscure caucuses. I n other states it involved looking into the choice of potential precinct committeemen and commit- teewomen, if those posts were dis- puted on primary ballots. Neither the caucuses or the primary ballots submitted a choice of important party officers. * * *

The League of Women Voters of Kansas warmed up its members to the idea of party precinct participation; “P3” they called it. They learned that there are 2,900 precincts in Kansas, and the state party chairmen were enlisted to prepare them for their adventure. “You will find on the primary ballots in 50 percent of the precincts no candidates at a11 for precinct committeemen,” one chairman said, T h e r e may be con- tests and a choice in 3 percent of them. I n the remainder there will be one uncontested candidate for each post. Where no candidates are listed, there may be write-in votes. I was once elected by a landslide of one write-in vote. On another occasion I was defeated 3 votes to 2,” And in Kansas, voting for the offices of precinct committeeman and committeewoman is the only participation offered to the members of the 97 percent non-activist section of the party.

In Colorado there was no such lim- itation of the participation of party

19701 OUR AILING PARTIES 301

members as in Kansas. The typical caucus of six or eight members in the precinct committeeman’s living room was privileged not only to re- elect or replace the precinct committeeman and committeewoman, but to select a delegation to the county convention (called county assembly) -one for every 30 of the 100 votes cast in the precinct for the last Democratic candidate for governor; or two, and one more, for every 50 of the corresponding Republicans; and a similar delegation to the congressional district assembly; and two delegates to the big statewide prepri- mary assembly of 1,500 members (potentially twice that number) who ‘(designate” party candidates for governor, U. S. senator and the other statewide offices subject to challenge or confirmation at subsequent primaries.

But all of these except the precinct committeemen were ephemeral. They served for an hour somewhere and were through. The continuing year- round managers of the party were not being submitted to selection in these 1,884 precinct meetings; they obtained party ofice in quiet indirect elections.

In Minnesota the state LWV told its members that in 1966 the attendance at precinct meetings was .5 of 1 percent of the eligible party members. League members preparing to attend their first such meeting found less than the usual uncertainty as to where to go since the Minnesota law required extensive publication of the times and places. The typical half dozen when assembled had a defined agenda-to select a precinct committeeman and committeewoman for

another two years, four delegates to the next county convention and sev- eral delegates to the congressional convention, 10 or a dozen altogether, all except the first two being for large one-session affairs with privately prearranged agendas.

But in 1968 there was one local episode. In March the sharp division of the Democratic party voters over the selection of delegates to the presi- dential convention between McCarthy and Humphrey led to a concerted raid on the frail caucuses by McCarthy supporters in Minneapolis. The New York Times of March 10 reported: “An outpouring of antiwar Democrats, many active in the party for the first time because of depth of feeling about the war, took over the caucuses in the same manner Barry Goldwater’s zealots did in many 1964 Republican grass roots caucuses.” But such dem- onstrations are exceptions which proved the prevalence of the opposite experience. * * *

In Maine, precinct participation meant attendance a t town caucuses or, in the few cities, at precinct caucuses, for choosing town or city committees of the party and large delega- tions to a state convention. The League of Women Voters reports that, in 10 districts in and near Portland, 2 percent of the eligible Democrats and 1.8 percent of the Republicans attended.

In Washington there were precinct caucuses in March 1968 but the Seattle newspapers forecast some dif- ficulties in finding where and when they would meet. The state chairmen of both parties had been quoted as admitting and deploring prior “lack

302 NATIONAL CIVIC REVIEW [June

of participation” in the 6,000 C ~ U - cuses; “for example, a precinct committeeman and his wife had held a caucus and elected each other to the district and county conventions.” The date was publicized, but a county chairman of King County (Seattle, 935,000 population) was publicly ac- cused “of trying to keep from the general public locations of the party’s precinct caucuses.” Of course the Leagues of Women Voters undertook to tell their members where and when caucuses were to be held. In one county, when they asked party head- quarters for the list, they met with a flat refusal. In other counties, they were warned in the Seattle Times, they might find that no precinct caucuses a t all would be held, leaving incumbent party officers to continue in command indefinitely. And a Se- attle Times editorial (January 14, 1968) asked, “Why the semi-secrecy that is attached to so many precinct caucuses?JJ * * *

Precinct participation was commonly described in LWV bulletins as the foundation of all party activities. So it is in the pyramidal diagrams, but it provides routinely less than 3 percent participation and is too flimsy a layer to pass as a foundation or a proper determining factor in party operations. Furthermore, the precinct caucus activities are too small and too numerous to be regulated or policed. There are some futile laws that require such meetings to follow a detailed procedure and specify that the session shall stay open for half an hour, lest prompt first arrivals rush through the business in the first five minutes. The newcomers and ama-

teurs who turn up cau be thwarted by rough or sly tactics-as in the days before such behavior compelled resort to state-conducted primaries. So in Texas and elsewhere the LWV members were warned : Plan to arrive at the Precinct Conven- tion 30 minutes early and . BE

If you and your friends are in the majority, do all these things quickly, and then adjourn and leave the place, being sure you follow correct procedure, etc.

From trustworthy sources comes the story of a college group in 1968 that undertook to clean up the local precinct of its party. The 30 members learned the law and regulations and descended unexpectedly on the five persons whom the precinct committeeman had assembIed. The latter delayed opening the meeting while telephoning went on to summon re- inforcements. But he was over- whelmed and the legal procedures were enacted with meticulous preci- sion, including his displacement from the party office. Next morning by 10 A.M. the certified report of the proceedings was conveyed by the triumphant reformers to the appropriate office in the county courthouse. At the door they met the “ousted” precinct committeeman, coming out.

To summarize such experiences, voters found their way into the ves- tibule of the party of their choice but not into any real influence. And they came away, like generations before them, having found that unless they joined the 3 percent of activists, assuming obligations to provide extensive personal service, they were out of the party activities for another

(Continued on page 340)

THERE WITH YOUR FRIENDS.

340 NATIONAI, CIVIC REVIEW

A more lengthy description and analysis is given of the practices prohibited by statute in Washington, with a comparison of the federal, state and local open housing provisions including activities covered, “exceptions allowed,” penalties and remedies, and administration of local housing ordinances. The appendices include maps illustrating the geographical distribution of the Negro population in Seattle, Spokane and Tacoma, as well as a list of the Washington municipalities which have adopted state fair housing ordinances as of October 1968. Other documents such as the Yakima fair housing ordinance and the rules of procedure of the Renton Fair Housing Commission are also appended.

The Chackerian bulletin concludes with an appropriate admonition, i.e., the intent of the federal civil rights act of 1968 and the state law of Washington seems to authorize to local units the op- tion of enacting and enforcing local ordinances against discrimination in housing practices. Many municipalities have re- sponded with ordinances substantially similar to the federal provisions, but others have enacted weaker laws with regard to the number of exemptions allowed and the remedies available to aggrieved parties. The warning is to the point: “If this is an accurate observation, municipalities must enact ordinances more in conformance with the state law if they wish to maintain control over fair housing issues.’’

OUR AILING PARTIES (Continued from page 302)

two years. The party management wanted their votes, of course, at the November election but were only sharing control with those who came into the structure via the precinct to stay and work, Sounds like justice until it is remembered that the party includes the non-activist 97 percent.

They contribute only their votes, but those votes in the end are the decisive factor in the life of the party.

But every party system excludes, or fails to enlist, a quorum of that 97 percent and leaves them out of the process of selection of the major party leaders.

Another look was taken by the National Municipal League in 1967. With the aid of state university political science departments and govern- mental research bureaus, information was collected to describe the diverse organizations, rules and procedures of the two major parties in each state (State Party Structures and Procedures; see also the REVIEW, No- vember 1967, page 568). Outstanding was the fact that important officers of the parties were always indi- rectly elected by these precinct committeemen or county committeemen whom the League of Women Voters went out to visit. The non-activist membership of each party is uni- formly denied any practical procedure for corrective insurgency and major party officers, good and bad, are secure in office. The systems make politics one of the learned pro- fessions and the 97 percent cannot be expected to learn the game. And they don’t.

But without going into politics, without taking precinct committeeman jobs, without attending caucuses of small importance or producing in- formed opinions on trivial candidacies on primary ballots, the party membership would take more interest if the real managers were submitted, as in New York, to direct election in primaries. A subsequent article will give details of such a party.

our ailing parties

Documents