I’ll make a motion tomorrow, December 10, at the 7:30 PM monthly meeting of Central Committee of the Montgomery County Democratic Party (MCDP) — HQ on Wilkinson Street.

Mr. Chairmen, I move that the Central Committee approve an expenditure of $500 for the purpose of promulgating this advertisement: “Notice To All Montgomery County Democrats  —  We Have Strength though widespread and democratic participation. Please consider nominating yourself to a leadership role in the Montgomery County Democratic Party. This is our year to reorganize. Help us reorganize with strength. To find out more, visit www.montgomerydems.org, or telephone Ms Murphy at 222-4007.”

In the meeting reminder note, about tomorrow’s meeting, Mark Owens, Party Chair, said, in part, “As 2010 approaches, I would like to remind you that this is a reorganization year for the Party.”

Reorganization is a big deal.  It is required of political parties by Ohio’s Revised Code and happens only every four years.  The Montgomery County Republicans will reorganize in 2012.

Reorganization of the Montgomery County Democratic Party will occur at a reorganization meeting in early June.  The big job at the Reorganization Meeting is nominating and selecting the Party Chairperson. The constitution gives the chair a lot of authority to form committees etc., and the chair serves for four years.  Only elected members of the Central Committee will be allowed to vote at the Reorganization Meeting.  (To become a candidate to the Central Committee, to be listed on the primary ballot, simply requires filing a petition with only five signatures from five registered Democrats in the precinct.)

Every position on the Committee is up for election this May during the Democratic Primary.  Every precinct can elect one member to the Central Committee, but most precincts are usually not represented.  At the 2006 reorganization meeting,  where Dennis Lieberman was chosen chairman, less than 20% of potential Central Committee members were in attendance.  (About 100 out of a possible 548.)

I’ve listed twenty-nine different articles — If We AreTo Have A Great Future, The Ascending Issue In Our Democracy Must Be Democracy Itself (November 9, 2009) — about democracy. My point is that it is no mystery why our political system is failing us — why, as a society, we seem incapable of optimizing our opportunities, incapable of planning effectively for the future — it is because our democracy is very very weak.

To vitalize our democracy, we need to vitalize our political parties.  A good first step would be to get more people effectively involved.  A good first step would be to expand participation.  The prospect of a Reorganization Meeting provides a good opportunity to invite Montgomery Democrats to become active in their party.  I hope my motion to actively advertise gets some consideration.

I was elected to the MCDP for the first time in 2006. I’ve been surprised to learn that the party as it now stands actually operates with a different vision than, four years ago, I naively assumed it would have. I realize that many active in the party disagree with the vision of the party that I’m advocating.  The party in the past has defended its anti-democratic practices.  (See list of articles below) Still, I hope tomorrow the Central Committe might discuss this important matter.  I will first need to get someone to second my motion — maybe in some amended form.

1. The Montgomery Democrats Decide to Suppress Democracy — Just Like the Republicans (December 14, 2007)
2. Victor Harris: Surprised That Local Democratic Party Wanted To Suppress Primary Competition (February 25, 2008)
3. How Gerrymandering Defeated An Outstanding Candidate And Sent a Weak Candidate To Columbus (March 5, 2008)
4. How Can The System Known As The United States Be Made To Work To Provide “Liberty and Justice For All”? (February 5, 2009)
5. Mark Owens Says Most Montgomery Dems Approve The Party’s Suppression Of Primary Participation (April 8, 2009)

I thought this conversation (see below), between Greg Hunter and David Esrati, interesting. It makes me want to know more.  If I stay tuned to Mr. Esrati’s site, I guess I will eventually be enlightened. He and Greg are posting these you-tube conversations on a regular basis.

The conversation is about “Edgefund.” Evidently, in Dayton, “Edgefund” provides free Dayton tax money to corporations who make promises to increase employment in Dayton. I’d like to know more. I wonder if there is a link to a source that explains?

Greg Hunter, in the conversation, suggests that the work and creativity that he and David are bringing together, in making these You-tube videos, should qualify for Edgefund money.  He said it as a joke, I think, but it is an interesting thought that leaders in Dayton should want to encourage a vibrant on-line community.  After all, isn’t there a consensus view now that finding the path to a better future is all about appealing to the Creative Class?

David raises the interesting question of whether this corporate welfare money might be better spent by investing directly in the community. His idea is to use the money to make the community more appealing.

I guess the question is, “Appealing to whom?” Isn’t Dayton seeking to appeal to the Creative Class? Greg Hunter’s suggestion makes sense, because, if it’s all about appealing to the Creative Class, then, it would be a big plus if Dayton would find ways to grow into a community know for its successful bloggers — particularly, bloggers known for their reasoned inquiry and thoughtful discussions, bloggers whose goal is to enlighten and educate.