fc
mun[x]
fi
erce.
uni
que.
i
nnovati
ve
march24 -26th
mount hol
yoke
college
Dear Delegates,
It is with great pleasure that we welcome you to the Tenth Annual Five College Model United Nations
Conference held from March 24 through March 26, on Mount Holyoke College’s scenic campus. We are
beyond thrilled to receive both you and your delegation!
Over the years, FCMUN has cultivated a reputation for being one of the most engaging and well-planned
conferences on the circuit and we plan to take this image one step forward. This year, our slogan is
“​Fierce. Unique. Innovative.​” We recognize that every detail is important in organizing a successful
conference, and hence our Secretariat includes a combination of well-seasoned delegates and students
with years of experience in events, logistics and business affairs to ensure that you have the ultimate
FCMUN [X]perience.
The conference is set to be propelled by intriguing discussions and exhilarating debate, and its social
mixers are geared to be full of fun and enthusiasm. We could not be more thrilled to welcome you to what
is sure to be one of the greatest MUN weekends of your life!
Your Secretary General,
Thaen Kanan 17’
1
Esteemed Delegates,
It is our extreme pleasure to welcome you to the 10th edition of the Five College Model United Nations
conference, FCMUN X. This year’s conference boasts an array of fascinating and
intellectually-stimulating committees; from attempting to save the world from a possible WWIII and
deciding the future of the Arctic, to deciding who has the power in the Da Ming Palace, and the fortune of
the Bluth family.
It has been an absolute thrill putting this conference together, and we are as excited as you are for it. In
anticipation, we encourage you to get intimate with your background guides and research materials for a
truly rewarding FCMUN experience. If you hit a stumbling block at any moment in your preparation
process, please feel free to reach out to your Crisis Directors - they are pleased to hear from you.
Looking forward,
Under Secretary Generals, Committees and Summits
Edith Amoafoa-Smart(Mount Holyoke College ‘19)
Shaye McDonald(Mount Holyoke College ‘17)
2
Dear Esteemed Delegates,
Welcome to FCMUN! My name is Amelia Benich and I serve as the Crisis Director for this
simulation of the Democratic National Committee. I hope you find this committee to be as exciting and
explosive as a season of The West Wing or House of Cards. I am majoring in both Economics and Film
Studies at Mount Holyoke College, so expect both statistics and drama as the crises go down.
In the current United States with a Congress controlled in both houses by the Republicans as well
as a Republican administration, it can feel as if the Democrats have been relegated to a minor role. But,
with the new DNC Chair and Deputy Chair, it is time for the Democrats to reorganize after a disastrous
election cycle, both in the primaries and the general. The central question of the party during the primaries
was one of centrism versus progressivism. Even if Hillary Rodham Clinton on paper and the DNC’s
platform on paper seemed progressive, the voters saw uninspiring centrism and citizens seem to be
hungry for a candidate that stirs them and speaks of change, hence Senator Bernie Sanders’ unexpected
traction in the primaries. Email leaks showed the old leaders of the party actively seeking to undermine
his campaign and while they were sent towards the end of the primary season, questions remain about
certain actions by Debbie Wasserman Schultz and others in the heat of the debates. If they wish to win
back the presidency in 2020, the Democrats must address where the 2016 primary took them.
In the age of Trump, a president with record low approval ratings, Democrats have the chance to
give hope to the citizens. Whether it is Elizabeth Warren persisting on the Senate floor or Marty Walsh
refusing to end Boston’s sanctuary city status, they have the chance to be a thorn in the side of the Trump
administration. Most importantly, they must prepare for 2018, where they could conceivably win back the
House and, with hard campaigning, move the Senate to a 50/50 split by defeating the Republican
3
incumbents in Nevada and Arizona. The Women’s March and the upcoming March for Science show that
the voters are fired up and beginning to organize--the Democrats must harness that power come midterms.
Other issues relating to the party will arise. As a note, the committee will be structured around
you as delegates producing something of a platform and strategy for the party by the end of the
conference (think a short resolution) with interruptions for crises with directives. This background guide
will summarize much of the current platform, but it is recommended that in preparation you visit
democrats.org and give the platform a skim for structure and further details. Additionally, I will be
sending out updates to the guides periodically since the Trump Administration has proven to be so
volatile. I encourage you to stay up to date on the current political landscape.
If you have any questions at all feel free to contact me at ​[email protected]​. I look
forward to meeting you all in committee!
Amelia Benich
CONTENTS
CONTEXT AND CURRENT SITUATION
4
Brief History of the Party [3]
Summary of the 2016 Primary Election [5]
Summary of the 2016 General Election [6]
Progressivism versus Centrism [9]
Activism and “Identity Politics” [10]
Landscape of 2018 Midterm Elections [11]
BLOCS AND INDIVIDUAL ISSUES [13]
Progressives [13]
Moderates [15]
National [18]
Local [19]
QUESTIONS TO CONSIDER [21]
FURTHER READING [21]
CONTEXT AND CURRENT SITUATION
History of the Democratic Party
5
This history will focus on important figures that have shaped the party but is brief and
focuses mainly on presidential figures. Delegates are encouraged to read up further on party
figures that they believe may have influenced their roles. For the sake of relevancy, this history
will begin with the 1912 Presidential Election, where Theodore Roosevelt ran as a third party
and began the development of the modern day Democratic Party.
In 1912, after a contentious primary, the Republican Party decided to run William
Howard Taft, a conservative, rather than Theodore Roosevelt again, signaling a new identity for
the Republicans. In response, Roosevelt started the progressive party, dedicated to the economic
and social justice of the time. Things like women’s suffrage and worker’s compensation were the
basis of the platform and thanks to his relative success in the Republican primary votes (Taft
largely won due to being better affiliated with the insiders of the party as well as having access to
better funding), he had a more substantial base.
However, this split in the Republicans led to an easy victory for Woodrow Wilson, whose
term as president was complex and was the impetus for a party shift. Suddenly, the Republicans
were extremely laissez-faire and anti-regulation and in 1932, the new Democratic Party was
officially born with the election of Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Roosevelt abided by Keynesian
economic theory with his New Deal, in which (very simplistically) government spending
promotes overall economic growth and elevated wages for the workers encourages consumption
spending which creates a virtuous cycle. His three re-elections showed the massive popularity of
his message and how successful it was for the country.
Going into the boom of the 1950s and especially the 1960s, we see the rise of an
economy with low income inequality and a strong middle class. John F. Kennedy runs and wins
as the first Catholic president, which at the time was groundbreaking. He is sometimes referred
to as the “originator of identity politics” as he used marginalized identities as a strong part of his
voting base. After his assassination, Lyndon B. Johnson took his place. LBJ was far more
influential in terms of policies enacted. His Great Society programs offered a higher standard of
living for all Americans and his willingness to sacrifice political points in the South to enact
Civil Rights legislation positioned the Democratic Party as the one for activism and progress.
6
After LBJ declared he had “lost the south for a generation”, Nixon and Reagan pushed
the country firmly to the right, with the next era of Democratic power being the time of Bill
Clinton. (Jimmy Carter has arguably had a greater impact on the world post-presidency, with
many historians rating his actual time as president as ineffective and inconsequential.) Clinton
represented a commitment to globalization and for many was a continuation of neoliberalism
despite his label as a Democrat. Plagued with scandals like Monica Lewinsky, much of the work
his administration is credited for seems to originate with his wife Hillary Rodham, who worked
with Senators on a number of child health insurance and protection laws. His repeal of parts of
the Glass-Steagall Act was a blow to the consumer protections Democrats had previously fought
hard to put into place. Additionally, his complicated relationship with LGBTQ+ rights includes
the damning Defense of Marriage Act yet also a doubling of HIV/AIDS research funding. He left
office with a budget surplus and a strong economy, despite whatever failures he may have had
due to the growing political polarization encouraged by right-wing leaders, particularly Newt
Gingrich.
After the disastrous George W. Bush Administration ending in a recession, America was
thirsting for change, which came in the form of Barack Obama, elected in 2008 on exactly that
platform. As the first black president, he faced extreme gridlock and anger from the Republican
Party, with Mitch McConnell spearheading a movement to block any and all actions from this
administration. Much of his work had to come in the form of executive actions which were
quickly overturned under Donald J. Trump. However, for the eight years he was in office, he
managed to pass the Affordable Care Act as well as bandage the broken economy with a bailout
of the banks and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Unfortunately, much of his
legacy is being destroyed as the current president undoes everything from fossil fuel regulations
to transgender rights.
It should also be noted the trends that have occurred in local government as of late.
Democrats are rapidly losing seats in state legislatures and governorships. Currently, 33/50
Governor’s Mansions are held by Republicans, even in “deep blue states” like Illinois and
Massachusetts. Because of this and the gridlock in the national Congress, much of the legislation
and change in this country is coming through state government. This is how abortion restrictions
7
and refusals of Medicaid expansion continue to proliferate1, two examples of policies the
Democratic platform is against.
Summary of the 2016 Democratic Primary Election
Hillary Clinton lost the primaries in 2008 in somewhat of a bitter way, as she technically
won the popular vote 48/47 despite losing the states. So, when she announced her bid for 2016,
the field looked empty. Martin O’Malley and Lincoln Chafee had weak followings and little
name recognition. It was not until Bernie Sanders entered the race that a competitor emerged.
Originally written off as a long shot, Sanders’ popularity grew thanks to the power of social
media and internet campaigns, most notably the /r/SandersForPresident subreddit and the
numerous Facebook and Twitter pages that coordinated a grassroots campaign. People,
especially young people, showed up to fight for his economic populism.
The primary became bitter quickly and showed the factions emerging among the
Democratic Primary. Clinton was clearly experienced and had far stronger name recognition,
especially among minorities. She garnered endorsements from civil rights leaders like John
Lewis as well as seasoned politicians. Sanders gained endorsements from major unions as well
as various members of the Democratic party, most notably Tulsi Gabbard, who stepped down
from her post at the DNC specifically so she could endorse him.
Despite the fact that Clinton and Sanders’ voting records matched 93.1% of the time2 ,
Clinton began to represent the moderates and the establishment politicians whereas Sanders
represented progressivism and an end to general corruption in Washington. Clinton was a
ruthless war hawk, Sanders was an daydreaming pacifist. Clinton was in bed with Wall Street,
Sanders was an old man yelling with the disorganized Occupy Wall Street. Essentially neither
side was willing to concede with the other despite their points being quite similar, leading to
contentious debate.
1
Though the Democrats largely do not use ALEC, the American Legislative Exchange Council, due to its
massive influence in local government and extreme conservative bend, delegates are encouraged to look
through the further reading provided at the end about the organization.
2
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/02/06/the-rare-times-that-hillary-clinton-and-bernie-s
anders-disagreed-in-the-senate/?utm_term=.5d77b76b6221
8
Clinton was out of touch with both millennials and
the working class, resulting in a number of missteps in
appealing to those voters, missteps that would come to
haunt her in the general. The picture on the left became a
meme among younger democrats, representing the two
problems perfectly--while touring a housing project in
Harlem, Clinton looks painfully out of place and
frightened, resulting in the photo going viral on social media and completely losing the original
message of helping out the working class.
Sanders had more egregious faults with his campaign. His sour relationship with Debbie
Wasserman Schultz always inspired some conspiracies about the party actively favoring Clinton.
While the most wild of these theories--actual vote tampering, for example--are clearly false,
during the General Election, Russian email hacks resulted in a mass leak of documents from the
DNC which clearly show favoritism for Clinton. (These leaks will be discussed further in the
General Election summary.)
Even if Sanders had an uphill battle to begin, some major missteps occurred on his
campaign, most notably his inability to properly organize in very blue states like California and
Massachusetts that he feasibly could have won. However, most of the races had margins of
victory that were razor thin, like Hillary Clinton winning Massachusetts with 50/49 split between
Sanders.
The bitterness of the primary led to an extreme takedown of both Sanders and Clinton
from the opposing sides, takedowns that arguably damaged Clinton’s reputation for the general
and have made the prospects of another Sanders run less likely.
Summary of the 2016 General Election
By June, Hillary Clinton was accepting the role as presumptive nominee and beginning
her campaign for the presidency. Because of the nature of the Republican Candidate, Clinton
largely abandoned the idea of a campaign around ideology and instead sought to run as the
patriotic American as her message rather than populism like Sanders.
9
This was not a normal election by any means. The situation is still evolving, but it is
becoming clearer and clearer that Putin and other Russian officials colluded with Trump to win
the election, with the most obvious example of this being the DNC Email Leaks. Within these
leaks, released just before the Democratic National Convention, officials are shown actively
attempting to undermine the Sanders campaign, with Debbie Wasserman Schultz writing “he
isn’t going to be president”.3 The more tangible actions taken by DWS include scheduling
debates at inconvenient, unpopular times or as stated in the emails, attempting to have Sanders
admit to being an atheist to drop his popularity among voters.
The revelations angered the Sanders supporters, who had felt patronized and demeaned as
“crazy college kids and young white men” throughout the campaign. They vocally protested at
the DNC, causing DWS to cancel her speech and eventually resign as chair. Donna Brazile took
over as interim chair. This rift between the young and the old, the progressive and the moderates
is the central issue facing the Democratic Party.
The convention saved face with stirring speeches from Michelle Obama, Joe Biden, and
most boldly Khizr Khan and his wife Ghazala, who had such lines as, “Have you ever been to
Arlington Cemetery? Go look at the graves of the brave patriots who died defending America -you will see all faiths, genders, and ethnicities.”4
Michelle Obama’s speech was notable in both its acknowledgement of the history of
slavery and racial injustice in this country, but also for a particular line which has been
championed by many within the left: “When they go low, we go high”5. For years of her
husband’s presidency, the Republicans have attempted to delegitimize him with birth certificate
nonsense and shutting down the Federal Government because of his Affordable Care Act. And
yet, even when faced with the symbol of all these injustices, Donald J. Trump, Democrats still
speak of compromise and growth in America. For voters though, this is becoming less and less
acceptable. They are fed up with how the Republicans are allowed to act like children, holding
the government hostage and refusing to confirm Obama nominees, and the Democrats act
3
4
5
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/23/us/politics/dnc-emails-sanders-clinton.html?pagewanted=all
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/full-text-khizr-khans-speech-2016-democratic-national/story?id=41043609
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/michelle-obama-when-they-go-low-we-go-high
10
essentially as babysitters, conceding point after point in hopes of making some sort of progress
later6 .
The election continued on, with Hillary Clinton choosing Tim Kaine as her running mate.
While Kaine was certainly effective in gaining Virginian votes and his endearing personality as a
sort of “soccer dad for America” may have charmed some, his performance in the VP Debate
was somewhat erratic and hyperactive, helping Mike Pence attempt to dignify the Republican
ticket7. Essentially Kaine may be a wonderful public servant who speaks fluent Spanish, but he
added nothing in terms of message or ability to gain progressive support or help in the Rust-Belt
states.
Rust-Belt States ended up being Clinton’s greatest weakness, despite her campaign’s
assumption it would be a firewall. Post mortem, commentators and accounts from voters in those
states show a good amount of the support for
Trump came from the economic despair of the
region. The citizens want change8. The economy
is already in a state of stagnating wages with
continued inflation and unions have been
decimated by conservative policies including
large-scale financial deregulation9 and corporate
tax cuts. Economists are in agreement that
Trump’s policies will undoubtedly ruin the working class, especially the white working class of
the Rust Belt10. But to many in those areas, Clinton represented everything they hated about
politics. She was establishment, she was stiff, and she went with detailed policies and laws, not
inspiring the masses with fire. Of course, Democrats were right in pointing out that those three
6
7
http://theweek.com/articles/664458/time-democrats-fight-dirty
http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/05/opinions/pence-kaine-debate-reaction-roundup/
8
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/21/disaffected-rust-belt-voters-embraced-donald-tru
mp-midwestern-obama
9
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/12/20/heres-the-real-reason-rust-belt-cities-a
nd-towns-voted-for-trump/?utm_term=.e8cda57fbbf8
10
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/9/13572172/donald-trump-white-working-class
11
things make her the safer choice for the Presidency--she was poised, she had a plan, and she
knew the ins and outs of executing it--but to those voters it did not matter.
This has caused many in the party to begin saying “Bernie would have won”. Trump used
nationalism and white identity to win the populace, but Bernie offered the polar
alternative--economic populism. Rather than Trump calling for a tariff on all Mexican imports
and a ban of their immigrants, Sanders would have countered with an infrastructure stimulus to
create well-paying jobs for Americans and worked with unions to strengthen them. Where
Trump yells about inner cities, Sanders would call for properly funding the public schools in
high-poverty areas so as to give opportunity to those who live there.
Not all the blame can be placed on Clinton as a candidate. James Comey and the FBI’s
involvement in bringing up Anthony Weiner as a way of lighting the fire of her overblown email
scandal certainly had an effect as an October Surprise. False equivocation and poor media work
led the voters to believe the thousands of scandals and lawsuits plaguing Trump were equivalent
to Clinton’s private email server, not to mention allowing his speeches and rallies to play live
without active fact-checking. Most importantly, systemic sexism and the inability of the
American people to accept an imperfect female candidate soured the campaign. But for the sake
of the DNC, the email scandal is behind them and they do not control the media, no matter what
Breitbart claims, so the failures of the Clinton campaign that could have been avoided must be
evaluated as they choose strategy going forward.
Progressivism versus Centrism: The Great Divide of the DNC Chair
The contentious primary election between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders pointed to
the fundamental rift in the Democratic Party. Will they be embracing progressivism or continue
on the moderate path?
The recent election of a party chair continued to play out this narrative. Keith Ellison was
supported by Bernie Sanders, Tom Perez by Joe Biden. Ellison was the populist, Perez was the
establishment. However, this dichotomy is even more illogical in this race. Perez worked for
years as the Maryland Secretary of Labor and later was the Secretary of Labor under Obama. He
additionally worked as the Assistant Attorney General on Civil Rights. In their analysis of
12
ideologies, 538 found that Tom Perez is significantly left of the average House Democrat11 . This
is a signal of the “establishment” compromising with a competent, diverse progressive, yet many
on the far left are frustrated and believe the party has not learned from its mistakes of the Clinton
campaign.
After being elected chair, Perez immediately
appointed Ellison the position of Deputy Chairman. It is
yet to be seen whether or not this is a ceremonial role or
if the two will be actively working together to make the
party stronger as a united force.
The Role of Activism in the Party
After an election that forced the United States to confront racism in ways not seen before,
the legitimacy of identity politics was called into question. If the party wishes to be a broad
coalition, some say it is necessary to lessen their influence on the party and instead move
towards something with a larger coalition.
The social justice advocates within the party take this as an attack on values of racial
justice, arguing that by abandoning identity politics for a broad economic-based platform the
party is giving into the white supremacy and racism of the current GOP. However, they do not
have the support of all progressive leaders. Sanders has been somewhat critical of the
divisiveness created by some of the young social justice movements12. There is validity to the
point that Clinton ran her campaign largely around denouncing racism and xenophobia and she
was defeated.
Activists provide the manpower and passion to fire up voters and make action happen.
The Women’s March and its continued campaign is a positive example of this in the age of
Trump, with the organizers continuing to promote action and further marches against the
administration. Could their organizing efforts be utilized to form effective campaigns on a local,
state, and federal level?
11
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/tom-perez-isnt-as-liberal-as-keith-ellison-but-hes-still-pretty-progressive/
http://www.salon.com/2016/11/23/reactionary-democrats-trash-bernie-sanders-for-challenging-identity-politics/
12
13
Landscape of 2018 Midterm Elections
While planning for the 2020 Presidential election is important, building momentum and
taking power of Congress in the 2018 Midterms is vital to maintaining the integrity of the offices
currently held by the “party-over-country” GOP. The House of Representatives would require a
24-seat pick up, whereas the Senate would require, for a bare minimum, all incumbent democrats
to be re-elected along with 3 Republican seats claimed. The strategies and discussions around the
two separate houses have distinct differences.
Senate
Refer to the map below to see which Senate seats are to be voted on in 2018:
13
As evident, the Democrats have an uphill battle simply by nature of their being 23 of their
incumbents up for re-election. Both independents caucus with the Democrats as well, and while
Bernie Sanders’ seat is essentially all but a guaranteed victory, Angus King (I-ME) is insecure.
Many of the Senate seats are of the exact states lost to Donald Trump in 2016 (most
notably Wisconsin, Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, and other Rust Belt states). This brings back up the
13
http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/2018-senate-democrats-are-very-exposed/
14
fundamental question of Progressivism vs Centrism. Since Donald Trump so effectively won on
a platform of radical change, is it smart for the democrats to shift their candidates to be more
soaring in their rhetoric and actions?
Claire McCaskil of Missouri is rated one of the most centrist members of the Democratic
Party. With her reelection campaign on the horizon, what will she run on to ensure her seat?
Continued centrism? A condemnation of the actions of the GOP? This question of how to run the
campaigns in the rust belt after such a blistering defeat in the general election remains. If the
Democrats slip up, they are looking at a Republican supermajority, perfect for Constitutional
Amendments and ending all filibusters for good.
While it would be nice to win back a majority in the Senate, the truth is, it is so highly
unlikely given how vulnerable the democrat seats are versus the Republicans. Dean Heller
(R-NV) holds one of the few contested Republican seats, so Democrats must be well organized
and ready with a plan and a candidate to immediately go to work. Changing demographics mean
Jeff Flake (R-AZ) could lose his seat to a Democrat as well, but what strategy will win Arizona?
Could Gabby Giffords, the former Representative of Arizona’s 8th District, be ready to return to
public service as she planned?
House
Unlike the Senate, which will largely be a retelling of the situation of 2016, the House
elections’ vulnerable seats are those of Orange County, CA, Texas, Florida, and beyond.
Whereas the Senate elections are centered around the white working class, the House elections in
the vulnerable districts will be especially focused on well educated people of all races, notably
latinos. They are suburban and overwhelmingly flipped to Clinton despite having their
representatives as Republicans14 . These are the people demanding town halls with their
representatives, requests that seem to be ending in either frustrating meetings or a refusal to even
meet1516 . Democrats can take the anger seen from citizens at town halls and channel it into an
organized campaign against these representatives.
14
15
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/2/27/14711522/2018-house-map
https://theintercept.com/2017/02/24/town-hall-meeting/
16
http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/naperville-sun/ct-nvs-citizens-town-hall-st-0224-20170224-story.htm
l
15
BLOCS AND PORTFOLIO POWERS
All members come with the powers of their respective roles in Congress, locally, etc.
Progressives
Known for their demands for change and a push for economic and social justice, the progressives
of the Democratic Party have serious popularity with the younger base of the left. They are
economic champions like Bernie Sanders and muckrakers like Elizabeth Warren. Their ability to
organize on a grassroots level and gain funding from small donations is unprecedented,
especially seen in Sanders’ primary run of 2016. As a bloc, they fight for activists and wish to
return the party to the left rather than let it retreat to a reactionary center.
Bernie Sanders
The infamous Bernard Sanders of Vermont made waves in 2016
with his bid for the Presidential Nomination. Though he ultimately was
defeated, he raised a surprising 60% of his funds via small individual
support17, signaling his campaign had incredible grassroots organizing.
This type of organizing will be vital to future elections, both at a local
and national level. To continue the momentum despite losing the
primary, Sanders has created Our Revolution, a political action organization that continues his
progressive work. Sanders is beloved among the younger generation of the left wing, a power he
can harness if effectively directed. Many are urging a 2020 run, but he is still a divisive figure for
the Democratic Party, with centrists fearing that his self-labeling as an independent or “socialist”
will be distasteful for the average American citizen. Others point to Hillary Clinton, the political
insider, and her loss as proof that someone calling for radical change can and will be embraced
by the populace. Regardless, he has spent a lifetime in public service and comes to the table in
2017 with strength and influence in the party.
17
https://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/candidate.php?id=N00000528
16
Keith Ellison
Ellison was Bernie Sanders’ choice for the DNC chair but
narrowly lost to Tom Perez. He comes with baggage and controversy
due to his questionable ties to the Nation of Islam, which he did
renounce in 2005. Just as Sanders divided the party due to his embrace
of the term “socialism”, Ellison has had a struggle for recognition in
the party because of his embrace of more extreme racial justice, like
reparations for Black America due to slavery, as well as general extreme leftism in some areas.
Regardless, as Deputy Chairman, he now has more influence on the direction of the party, albeit
not as much as Tom Perez. He is a known champion of grassroots organizing, running his
campaigns and winning with 70% or more of the vote and running an almost-successful DNC
Chairmanship run from essentially nothing.
Elizabeth Warren
Infamous for persisting, Elizabeth Warren has become a symbol
for progressivism and economic activism with her fiery speeches and
grassroots work. Her work to expose corruption on Wall Street has lead
to her reputation as someone with investigative prowess. She has been
floated as a possible presidential candidate, however her work in the
Senate is vital and effective enough that many believe she holds more
value as a Senator.
Al Franken
Originally an actor on Saturday Night Live, Al Franken has been
Senator of Minnesota since 2008. He runs on the platform of the more
specific Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party, the same party of
which Keith Ellison is a member. He has gained prominence within the
party since his vetting of Trump’s cabinet which put him in the media
spotlight. Suggestions of a presidential run have come up thanks to his
likability and having “just the right amount” of progressive to appeal to voters.
17
Eleanor Holmes Norton
The representative of the people of Washington D.C., Eleanor Holmes
Norton has a voice and is not afraid to use it. She began her work as a black
feminist in the 70s and later sought to be a political force. Her roots in
activism informed her campaigns which she now regularly wins with 80-90%
of the vote. Despite this, her political power is limited as she does not have a
vote in Congress due to D.C. not achieving full statehood. Regardless, she is
a fundraising force for the party and her perspective grows in importance.
John Lewis
As a notable Civil Rights Activist and continued member of the House of
Representatives, John Lewis has been a thorn in the side of Donald Trump.
His ties to the black activist community and his credibility as one who
worked with Martin Luther King Jr. make him respected by both the
progressive wing, of which he identifies with, and the centrists. This respect
elevates his voice and puts him on good terms with much of the party.
Moderates
In an attempt to appeal to the independents, many in the Democratic Party have taken a
calculated approach to the political landscape. Perhaps they make sweeping statements, but their
actions speak of compromise and nuance. As a bloc, they are less united in terms of policy due to
the individual give and take, but make no mistake--they are powerful within the party.
Cory Booker
While his statements on subjects like the economy, gay rights, and
women’s rights are beloved by progressives, when it comes down to his
actual work, Cory Booker is a moderate. He most notably voted against
an amendment that would have made prescription drugs in the United
States far cheaper because he represents the state of New Jersey, where
18
many drug companies are headquartered.18 Additionally, he received over $250k in donations
from the pharmaceutical industry to fund his campaigns. This incident for many on the
progressive left signals the great need to remove money from politics. Many on both sides view
him as flair without substance, as he often makes grand publicity actions like testifying against
Sessions without any real action to back it up further, i.e. writing civil rights legislation or
protesting with civil rights leaders. He has been suggested as a presidential candidate, however
his seat in the Senate is vital and cannot be assured to stay Democrat if he leaves.
Jon Tester
As a senator of Montana, Tester has been a pivotal part of maintaining a
presence in the West for Democrats. He also represents a conservative within
the party, as he splits on issues such as the Keystone XL Pipeline and gun
rights. However, many of his positions mirror the populism seen by Sanders
supporters, particularly his disdain for the lobbyists and influence of money
on Washington D.C. His ideology is inconsistent and evolving, for example
his new support of marriage equality in 2013. Tester is up for re-election in 2018, and with his
margin of victory in 2012 being 0.9%, he will be campaigning for every last vote.
Claire McCaskil
Perhaps the most contentious Senate seat in the 2018 race,
McCaskil needs to begin working now to secure her seat in the US
Senate. She represents a rare type of Democrat and is consistently rated
one of the most moderate Democrats in Congress and frequently votes
outside the Democratic caucus. Her state was a solid supporter of Donald
Trump, which calls for her election to be a focus of strategy in 2018.
18
https://theintercept.com/2017/01/12/cory-booker-joins-senate-republicans-to-kill-measure-to-import-cheapermedicine-from-canada/
19
Chuck Schumer
The Minority Leader in the Senate, Schumer is a clear moderate,
refusing entirely to engage in the economic progressivism that has grown
so popular. He claims on record that “for every blue-collar Democrat we
lose in western Pennsylvania, we pick up two moderate Republicans in
the suburbs of Philadelphia”19. He is essentially the anti-Bernie, the polar
opposite, the Blue-Dog Democrat. Yet at the same time, he joined
Sanders in endorsing Ellison for the DNC Chairmanship. Was it a signal of embracing a new
progressive agenda or a compromise of sorts?
John Bel Edwards
As an army veteran who is openly pro-life and pro-gun, Edwards is
by no means the typical Democrat. But, in 2015, he won the
gubernatorial election in the deep-red southern state of Louisiana by
56% of the vote. During his time as governor, he has protected
LGBTQ+ Rights and sought Medicaid expansion in the state. His perspective and experience can
serve as a case study in upcoming local elections, especially if Democrats want to turn the tide
and begin to dominate local governance or even the South again.
National
There are certain figures in the Democratic party known not for their caucus within the
party but rather their importance on a national scale. These are the figureheads of the party,
people whose words and actions help tip the scale in favor of the progressives or the moderates,
depending on how they address the crowd. Additionally, this will include the infamous major
contributor to the Democratic cause, George Soros.
19
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/438481/chuck-schumer-democrats-will-lose-blue-collar-whites-gain-su
burbs
20
Tom Perez
Perez’s role and credentials are discussed earlier in the section on
Progressivism vs. Centrism, but for a brief overview of his role as chair,
he oversees the strategy and platform of the Democratic Party as well as
fundraising. While he was endorsed by the centrist wing of the party
during the election, he is commonly referred to as the most progressive
member of Obama’s cabinet and seeks to bridge the divide within the
party.
Joe Biden
Known for his love of ice cream and service as a longtime Senator
and later Vice President, Biden has not quite left public service. While
he currently is serving as a professor at the University of Pennsylvania,
he continues to claim he has not decided on a 2020 run for president20.
He has popularity among progressives and centrists and is extremely
likable. He has proven to be an effective tool for campaigns and rallies
as well as memes.
George Soros
Despite his net worth of around $25 billion, Soros leans
progressive in terms of economics and social programs. Having
graduated from the London School of Economics, his views are far
more complex and detailed than the average politician in the party,
having done research on reflexivity in the economic system. He has
donated billions of his own personal wealth to causes like public healthcare and nonviolence. In
the weeks following the election, he has lost a significant amount of money due to his incorrect
prediction of a Clinton win and the subsequent state of the stock market after. However, he is
still one of the richest people on earth and can significantly help the party and its causes.
20
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/17/magazine/joe-biden-i-wish-to-hell-id-just-kept-saying-the-exact-same-t
hing.html?pagewanted=all
21
Local
Democrats’ most major issue is their inability to effectively organize for local elections.
Because of this, the voices of successful local governance must be elevated. Some of the
previously mentioned names in the Moderate and Progressive caucuses also are figures of the
local elections, however the names listed here have a more complicated relationship with either
side, leading them to be listed here under the Local Governance Caucus.
Wendy Davis
Famous for her 2013 Filibuster, Wendy Davis has made a name for
herself within the Democratic party, especially among the women of
the party who see her as a feminist hero. She ran a failed gubernatorial
campaign for Texas, a long shot but an admirable one, and her work in
the Texas State Senate was admirable. Though she no longer holds
public office, she seems ready for a role in the US House of
Representatives or even the Senate, possibly. Perhaps a run for a
vulnerable Texas Republican district is in order? Her name
recognition is far beyond the average new candidate.
Bill DeBlasio
Local government, truly local government, does not often result in
popularity. So, despite being a progressive who has worked to fix bad
police practices and other minority issues as well as tackle issues of the
working class, Bill De Blasio still sees falling poll numbers21 . Notably,
his popularity is falling with white voters22. His election is coming later
this November, but no significant challengers have sprung up in the
Democratic Primary yet. Paul Massey of the Republican party holds the
greatest threat on the right. De Blasio knows about the gritty work of policy at the truly local
level and offers a fresh, down to earth perspective for a party that can often get lost in the stars.
21
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/26/nyregion/mayor-bill-de-blasio-democratic-primary.html?pagewanted=al
l
22
http://nypost.com/2016/06/12/theres-one-thing-dividing-new-yorkers-bill-de-blasio/
22
QUESTIONS TO CONSIDER
● Where should the party go from here? Progressivism? Activism? Populism? Moderation?
● Should the Democrats begin “fighting dirty” as the Republicans did to Obama? Some
argue that we must be the “better person”, whereas other believe the policies of Trump
are too unjust not to obstruct.
● How can Democrats work towards campaign finance reform without hurting their party?
● Will voting reforms such as making the election day a federal holiday be essential to
mobilizing Democrats at a local level or is there a better ground strategy they should be
using?
● How should Democrats be responding to the Donald J. Trump administration? Let it
implode while standing back? Ardently call for investigation? Work on a 2020 plan
today?
FURTHER RESEARCH/REFERENCES
Footnotes are available for further research and marked when relevant.
On The Issue allows you to look up the voting and statement records of elected officials,
organized by political issue. ​http://www.ontheissues.org/default.htm
For a history of the economic policies of the left as well as an explanation of their appeals to all,
check out the documentary ​Inequality For All, available on Netflix.
For an interactive map of the 2018 Senate races, 270 To Win
(​http://www.270towin.com/2018-senate-election/​)
The New York Times articles linked in the footnotes are incredibly thorough, but this one in
particular is especially cohesive and helpful in understanding the goals to take back the
House in 2018:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/22/upshot/democrats-best-bet-for-house-control-is-followingthe-sun.html?_r=0&pagewanted=all
23
Last Week Tonight is an incredibly well researched show, despite its entertainment value being
equally high. Below are a number of clips centered around pertinent issues to the Democratic
Party which are quite exhaustive.
Primaries and Caucuses: ​https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_S2G8jhhUHg
Democratic National Convention: ​https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUCnjlTfXDw&
ALEC/State Legislatures: ​https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIMgfBZrrZ8
24