Counterpoint | The lessons of the Minneapolis DFL convention process

Opinion editor’s note: Strib Voices publishes a mix of guest commentaries online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

What’s obvious to me, in reading through literally thousands of comments and the media coverage of fallout from the Minneapolis DFL convention, is that people partake of that process with no idea of an overview of the process, overall goals or even how to properly advocate for themselves. Then there are people who have learned through experience how to set appropriate expectations for themselves and for caucus and convention outcomes.

We must do better at bringing new people into that process. Going all in on access and equity is necessary, but to what end when people lack skills to fully participate or worse, come away with incorrect notions of what actually happened? How is that not just as disenfranchising?

I’ve been participating in parliamentary procedure and political process since I was a teen, having watched my parents and others do so well before that. I studied political science as well as philosophy in college, to have a deep understanding of the purpose, goals and tolerances of the system we use to govern ourselves. I am far from typical of the people we bring into the process of participatory governance.

Currently anyone can get the idea that they can know enough about almost anything, thanks to technology providing a skim coat of information about topics that some people spend their whole lives working to understand. How can we provide the best experience to participants, so they have a workable understanding and don’t become exploited for partisan conflict?

Because that’s what I’m seeing: People spouting nonsense in service of a partisan goal that may or may not even be aligned with their own stated ideological leaning. People with great sense of urgency, are seeking to remake the entire caucus and convention system on the fly to solve a problem they themselves don’t even really understand.

The most worrisome thing to me, in this whole episode, is how easily people choose to throw away the very framework of participatory democracy.

A primary takes away the direct and deliberative participation of our popularly selected body and replaces it with a simple contest where community-based goals are never discussed or deliberated. Campaigns and elections are so much more than a simple contest. They are the proving ground for ideas and projects of import to communities, cities and governance. Resolutions that percolate out of caucuses and conventions can be turned into policies that impact us all. Grassroots democracy is an American birthright, yet some people wish to toss it aside for comfort and convenience.

When I hear those reasons, I hear that people don’t want to be bothered with the work of governance. And that’s their right, but they are then limited by the work of those who participate. Convention participants considered rules and amendments to move the convention business along. We worked our way through the committee-set agenda, and when problems like a faulty election system sprung up, the convention voted on how we would respond and then did so.

Tellers and credential volunteers tracked quorum. Then the Frey campaign told its delegates to leave to sabotage an endorsement vote when it failed to run out the clock with other tactics. Few, if any, checked out with the credentials table as delegates are required to do, so there is no way to actually know if quorum was maintained other than the head count of tellers on the floor. Perhaps it was; I don’t know. But it’s clear that the Frey campaign was setting up the very situation it brought to the state DFL committee that ultimately decided to overrule the majority of the body of work completed by hundreds of delegates and volunteers.

People who participated in the convention know mistakes were made. We know that there was confusion. But too many people were not in the know about what was happening and why. The lack of confidence in that body of work is being twisted and spun into conflict in the service of partisan ends. Providing basic expectations and skills training is something we can and should do as part of the process that would prevent such exploitation going forward. People devoting the time to participate deserve that.