Maviglio: The Truth About The California Democratic Party’s Elections

Nobody likes losing. Particularly close races. And I don’t blame some the backers of some of the losing candidates for executive positions in the recent California Democratic Party officer elections for being disappointed by the results.

But sadly, these losses are being chalked up to Black Helicopter-like conspiracies, suggesting the party is operating without transparency and perhaps outside of the law.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

Here’s the process that prevented that from happening. This gets a little geeky, so stay with me.

First, to cast a ballot, delegates were required to sign their name on at least three records, all of which are maintained by the CDP at the end of the process.

First they had to sign the registration form when picking up their credential. Second they had to sign a second form when they pick up their ballot. Third they had to sign the ballot itself.  In addition the voters had to sign their credential, though this record is kept by the voter and would not be part of the current review.

Further, any voter not present themselves, wishing to have their vote cast by a proxy, had to go through an additional process. They had to submit a written proxy form, which has to be reviewed and approved by a member of the CDP Credentials Committee.

Second, once a voter has gone through all these steps, and actually marked their ballot, they are required to insert their ballot into a sealed ballot box that is in public view in the voting room. These ballot boxes are constantly monitored by either CDP staff or a member of the Credentials Committee. Furthermore observers of the various campaigns are offered the opportunity to monitor the entire process – and they did. Observers of nearly every campaign were in the room.

Third, if any individual does not appear on the official list and otherwise believes they should be eligible to vote, they are automatically issued a provisional ballot.

Fourth, the sealed ballot boxes were only opened in view of election observers, who were then present during the entire counting process, with no ballot ever leaving the counting room, providing no opportunity for so-called “ballot stuffing”

Fifth, no ballots are “destroyed.”  In a handful of cases, ballots do have to be voided (not destroyed). For example, a voter may spoil their ballot and request a replacement. In this case, a new ballot is created in public view (with an announcement made to any election observers present) and the voided ballot is retained in case it is needed for any subsequent review or ballot reconciliation.

Sixth, no part of the counting process relies on so called electronic voting systems (closed or open source). The entire process is conducted manually using paper ballots. There is no way to “hack the vote.”

Seventh, this manual counting process is built around a system of redundancy. Every single ballot is counted and then recounted by a second individual.  If the counts do not match, the ballots are counted again until the vote is reconciled.  Where questions of voter intent arise, preliminary determinations are made by members of the Credentials Committee.  Observers from the campaigns are allowed to be present during this entire process.

Eighth, all these records are maintain and available for review. Original appointment forms.  County committee rosters.  Sign in sheets. Proxy forms.  The ballots themselves.

Ninth, the CDP does not have secret ballots. While not the reason for the rule, it provides an incredible disincentive to try to cheat the system. Any suspected problem ballot can be individually identified, tracked, and segregated from the rest of the vote. For this reason, the proverbial bad apple cannot spoil the bunch.

Kimberly Ellis lost the election for chair. Her observers were in the room, carefully monitoring every vote counted.  Her team now is reviewing the ballots – as are candidates for other offices. This is a long-standing tradition. (In fact, candidates in the past reviewed the ballots, oftentimes so they could send thank you notes to their supporters.)

That is her right. No one is opposing it.

And it’s Eric Bauman’s right to move forward in his role of chair of the Party. He believes, rightly so, that we have no time to waste to win back Congress and keep the governorship, every single constitutional office in the state, and our supermajority in the Legislature.

Republicans are making hay of the organized chaos at the convention. It’s time to move on — for our party’s sake.

It’s time for the party to heal, not for litmus tests and accusations based on ignorance and paranoia. California Democrats cannot afford to be a circular firing squad.

Steven Maviglio, President of Forza Communications, a Sacramento-based political communications strategy firm and former press secretary to Governor Gray Davis and Speakers Fabian Nunez, Karen Bass, and John A. Perez.

Opinions expressed in editorials belong to the authors and not Voice of OC.

Voice of OC is interested in hearing different perspectives and voices. If you want to weigh in on this issue or others please contact Voice of OC Involvement Editor Theresa Sears at TSears@voiceofoc.org

For a different view on this issue, consider: 

Block: Coup in the California Democratic Party?

 

 

 

  • Carlos Marroquin

    ? BERNIE SANDERS BRIGADE RESPONDS TO THE CA DEMOCRATIC PARTY POLITICAL INSIDERS
    The DNC, the CA Democratic Party, the establishment and political insiders like Steven Maviglio just don’t get it. Californians have had it with corruption and election shenanigans. In the rush to keep up with business as usual, political insiders are coming out to cry foul and to defend the establishment’s positions. What Mr. Maviglio and others are failing to understand is that the party is in really bad shape. It is divided, broken and extremely weak. By insisting on keeping things the way they are, the establishment not only guarantees Trump another four years, but we risk turning more people off and away from the party.

    Make no mistake, people are not happy with the party. Under the current leadership we have seen homelessness and unaffordable housing reach alarming numbers. People still have to work two or three jobs to make ends meet. We have a broken and outdated election system. The massive fraudulent presidential primaries was enough to make anyone hate the party and turn their backs on politics. We could go on and on with the shenanigans and failures of the establishment. This has gone on for too many years and it has to stop.

    Californians want change. The party continues to resist changes and ignores the will of the people. So while supporters of the establishment lineup to write articles we remind them that this is not about Kimberly Ellis, but about the will of the people that are demanding changes. Kimberly Ellis is a Hillary Clinton supporter has done what no other politician has been able to do, she brought Bernie and Hillary supporters together. I ask you Mr. Maviglio, what has the party establishment has done to bring unity? What have they done to welcome Bernie supporters into the party?
    #CADEM #DNC #DemocraticParty #EricBauman #KimberlyEllis #California #CA #LosAngeles #SanFrancisco #SanDiego #InlandEmpire #cbs #nbc #abc #ktla5 #FoxNews #SacramentoBee #LATimes #LAWeekly

    • Steven Maviglio

      “The party is in really bad shape.” Seriously? The Governorship, every constitutional office, 2/3 of the Legislative seats, and 8 million plus registered Democrats.

      • David Steele

        All great on paper. But the facts of what is actually getting done and how it’s getting done belies your sweeping generalization. Search your feelings, you know this to be true.

        • Steven Maviglio

          You think? Addressing climate change, traffic congestion, drug prices, balancing the state budget, housing…

  • Greg Diamond

    I’m really surprised to see Steve Maviglio himself participating below. I’d have come here much earlier had I known. I’m less surprised to see him engaged in a slap-fight with another commenter or two, let alone to see him criticizing a commenter for not using a last name. You have much to learn about Orange County’s blogosphere, Steve, which makes Thunderdome look like nursery school nap time.

    You also have much to learn about election fraud, and specifically about the weaknesses in the recent CDP elections that you so blithely defended. I’ve tried to do my part to aid your understanding here:

    http://www.orangejuiceblog.com/2017/06/baumans-mouthpiece-maviglio-visits-voc-to-refute-joel-block-lets-take-his-claims-apart/

    I would like to get your opinion on one thing, though: what’s your opinion on THE SAME LAW FIRM defending BOTH Eric Bauman and the California Democratic Party in the current conflict? Do you think that there’s a possible conflict of interest there? If not, why not?

  • Lauren Steiner

    Why is it not disclosed that the author of this article is working for Eric Bauman and the California Democratic Party, a conflict of interest for sure. Second, the irregularities that are being alleged have nothing to do with this laundry list. People voted twice in that proxies were proxies for more than one AD delegate. Proxies did not live in the Assembly District of the AD delegates they were proxies for. Signatures did not match. And people were threatened with loss of business for not voting for Bauman. These are just a few of the irregularities. Let him explain away those.

    • Steven Maviglio

      Because I’m not working for Eric Bauman and the Democratic Party. Too bad you can’t get that single fact correct, never mind anything else.

      • Lauren Steiner

        Again, great rebuttal skills for a communications professional. My bad: you were workking for Eric and got fired. How about you tell me which other facts I got wrong?

  • kburgoyne

    Thanks, Steve. Very educational. I’m not much into conspiracy theories, so all the surrounding thrashing isn’t of much interest and generally a huge waste of energy.

    The one point where the CDP could make legitimate adjustments is in how much weight elected officials get versus the grassroots. There is some logic in those who have actually won elections to have something more of a say. They did get a majority of people to vote for them. However my analysis of the weighting is that it makes it simply “too” hard for the grassroots. There should still be a kind of “supermajority” requirements for the grassroots to impose significant change, but it seems to me the burden is a bit beyond that.

    The concerns are similar to the concerns the Founders had regarding the House of Representatives versus the Senate. Which in the case of the Founders translated into giving the House 2 year terms and the Senate 6 year terms. The House was intended to reflect (the often irrational and flighty) whims of the people, while the Senate was to provide some stability to minimize how much our (federal) government was flapping around in the breeze.

    • Steven Maviglio

      Interesting perspective. Thank you for your comments.

  • Marga

    The truth is that Maviglio is a paid fixer for Eric Bauman. He was hired the moment that Bauman was purportedly elected Chair to ridicule and intimidate the progressives into the party into accepting what appear to be fraudulent election results. While Bauman claims to have fired Maviglio – his anti-union/pro-fracking work did not go well with some of the people who naively thought Bauman cared about unions and fracking -, here he is, still doing Bauman’s dirty work. Shame on him. But no, people who work to take away benefits from poor paid employees while apparently vacationing in their own castle in Italy, have no shame.

    • Steven Maviglio

      Sad and pathetic comment based on other misinformation. I’m not working for Eric. The views are my own. And while you hide behind your trolling screen name, I’m proud to have been working for public employee unions to protect their retirement security and for the environmental community to protect our clean air and water (and have a 20 year track record of doing so). And if I have a castle, can you please tell me where it is? I’m anxious to know.

      • Marga

        It’s pretty amazing that you are getting the details of your own biography wrong. You were last working for AT&T /against/ the union. Here is an article from 10 days ago that quotes you as AT&T’s spokesman. How quickly you forget. http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/03/22/att-strike-bay-area-workers-among-17000-who-walked-off-the-job-in-california-nevada/ For more just google “steven maviglio AT&T”

        And here is an article form Consumers Watchdog that accuse you of lobbying for fracking while owning fracking stock. You don’t protect the air or the environment by encouraging the production and burning of fossil fuels. http://capitolwatchdog.org/article/frack-pack-prevails-fair-political-practices-commission

        There is, of course, no way for anyone to know whether Eric is still paying you – or whether any of his dirty backers, such as Big Pharma, are. But he did hire you as communication directors for the CDP,. I’d be interested in knowing how much he paid you for the few days “work” you did – if by “work” we understand, smearing and attacking the Party’s progressive base.

        • Steven Maviglio

          Perhaps you should start by providing your name instead of hiding behind the trolling screen name of “Marga” for a start.

          Yes, I work for AT&T, California’s largest union employer. If you actually had googled a bit more, you’ll note most of the work I do for the company is about policy issues. The quote you cite is the quote of our national folks that I reissued. To suggest that I’m anti-union is laughable, considering I’m actually a spokesperson for a public employee coalition on another issue.

          As for Consumer Watchdog, it was a bogus accusation. In reality, I’ve worked on AB 32, Prop 23, Prop 39, Prop 53, for EDF, NRDC, and many other groups. Because I happened to own a stock that is oil related has nothing to do with my work. Again, if you actually took the time to talk to people in the environmental community, you’d realize your attack makes no sense.

          I’ve never “smeared” progressives. I am one. But I sure as heck will call out people who make stuff up and are more interested in litmus tests than in helping the party.

          • Marga

            You are a riot. You are supposed to be a communication specialist and you are here attacking on my name? Sheesh, I’m sorry you don’t like it, too bad my parents didn’t consult with you and get your approval before they named me. Is this yet another service you provide to your clients? Pre-approved baby names?

            It’s interesting that you are willing to affirm that you are in the habit of reissuing other people’s quotes and claiming them as your own. That’s exactly what you seem to have done with this article: taken Bauman’s propaganda and claimed it as your own.

            So you happened to work to kill a fracking ban while you happened to own oil stock. And this means nothing. Sure, just like Bauman happening to take six figures of Big Pharma money while he was vice-chair to kill Prop 61, and the Democratic Party happening to not endorse Prop 61, means nothing. Just a coincidence, I’m sure.

            But this begs the question, if you were so innocent and you were working for unions rather than against them, and for a fracking ban, rather than against it – why would Eric Bauman sack you after a few days when the unions and the progressive activists started to put pressure on him? Surely if he knew better, he would have stuck up for you rather than fold immediately.

            And you called progressives “petulant children”, if that’snot a smear, I haven’t seen one. And don’t confuse helping your pocket book with helping the party. The only way the Democratic Party can rebuild is by standing for something: a woman’s right to chose, social and racial justice, a clean environment, peace and human rights, medicare for all. A Party that stands for nothing other than taking corporate money and pushing corporate interests is a party on its deathbed.

          • Steven Maviglio

            Share your last name like everyone else on this thread and stop hiding, that’s all I ask.

            As John Burton put it, if you don’t like the Democratic Party, go out and make one of your own. Your pal Bernie Sanders still is an “Independent” in the Senate, and your idol Roseann DeMorro didn’t support the Democratic nominee for President and supported Ralph Nader over Al Gore.

          • Marga

            Oh, Steven, I would have shared my last name, but you’ve been so obnoxious that I’ll make you work for it. Go ask Eric Bauman. He’ll be happy to tell you.

            And John Burton is right: we should go and make a Democratic Party of our own.
            That’s exactly what we are doing. Working to expel the profiteers and DINOs who are in the party either to make money for themselves or the corporations they represent, and filling it back with actual citizens. I know the possibility of the Democratic Party actually being democratic and working for people rather than corporate profits is extremely scary for those of you who see it as a meal ticket, but that’s exactly why this fight is on.

          • Steven Maviglio

            Make it easy on yourself: go create a Tea Party of your own. Your arrogance will fit right in there. It’s a shame you don’t put your energy into defeating Republicans instead of hating Democrats that don’t pass your self-indulgent litmus test.

          • Marga

            Wait, isn’t that what you accused us of doing? And remember, the Tea Party is merely a movement within the Republican Party, not an actual independent party. And they elected Trump and they seem to be fairly happy with him.

            And we are putting our energies into defeating Republicans – whether they call themselves Republicans or whether they call themselves Democrats, as you do. The whole idea that we should support someone who is anti-choice, anti-envrionment, anti-social justice, anti-human rights, anti-equality just because they have tons of corporate money behind them and they choose to run as Democrats is absurd.

            Why don’t you join the Republican party and work to make the world a better palce for corporations from there? Oh, yes, I forgot – it’s because the Republicans ruined their brand in California. Well, work to rebuild it instead of trying to usurp our party with your pro-corporate agenda.

          • Steven Maviglio

            Yes, I’m guilty of being a capitalist. Last time I checked, so were most Americans.

            You lost. Get over it.

            P.S., it’s spelled “environment.”

          • Marga

            Are you sure it’s not spelled “pathetic”? Is there another spelling for a grown man that attacks a woman on her name and on a couple of typos? 🙂

            The Democratic Party should be a big tent, welcoming people of all races, ethnicities, religious and national backgrounds, gender identies and orientations, etc. But being a big tent does not mean welcoming people with all ideologies. We neither should nor can be a large enough tent to include Wall Street and Occupy war street, the military industrial complex and the peace movement, the prison industrial complex and BLM, racists/antisemites/islamophobes/homophobes/etc. and the people they seek to oppress.

            The Democratic Party is losing because it stands for nothing. We need to take back form consultants and politicians who sell themselves to the highest bidder and bring it back to the people.

            We don’t need to form a party of our own, we have one, we just need to expel those who use it as a cash machine.

          • Steven Maviglio

            Now I know why you don’t want your name in print. I have no idea if you are a man or a woman because you refuse to publish your name.

            The California Democratic Party is not “losing.” We hold the governorship, all the state’s constitutional offices, and 2/3 of the Legislature. There are more than 8 million registered Democrats for the first time. I’m very proud to be part of the team that’s made that happen.

            We don’t need to expel anyone. We need to bring more people into our party, a concept which you can’t seem to grasp.

          • Marga

            Huh? You know what my name is, Marga. You made fun of it before, remember? just a few hours ago? And a quick google of “Marga name” will tell you it’s a female name. That if you actually managed to spend your whole life without meeting any Magas, Margarets, Marguerites or Margaritas. Which seems doubtful. But hey, honesty does not seem to be your strong suit, does it?

            You are totally right that Republicans have so hurt their brand in California, that they now must run as Democrats in order to get elected. But having Republicans run as a Democrats and be elected as such, only to vote like Republicans does not help anyone, much less the CDP. It only makes it clear how irrelevant it’s become as an institution. Sure, if all you care about is how much money you can make from your affiliation with the party, the party’s relevancy may be of secondary interest to you – but for those of us who are fighting to implement progressive legislation – aka, those of us who are fighting against you and your clients -, it matters much.

            You are right that Democratic Party needs to bring in people, and yet you have made it very clear that you don’t want progressives – and young people – to join. YOuvé quoted John Burton to say that progressives should create their own party, you called young Demorats “contemputous children” for not ascribing to your “corporate money first” ideology. So while you know the party needs to grow, you apparently want it to grow by courting Republicans. Alas, I think there are few Republicans left to court – most of those who could be made to change affiliations have already.

          • Steven Maviglio

            Actually, integrity is my strong suit. You ought to try it sometime. Beginning with identifying yourself. I realize that’s a tall order, but I suspect you don’t want anyone to know who you are so you can disassociate yourself with the nonsense that you’ve writing today. Perhaps providing some points of interest instead of endless rants riddled with spelling errors (btw, it’s “Democrats” not “Demorats”) and spewing hate toward people who don’t agree with your narrow perspective would be a more efficient use of your time and this space.

          • Marga

            Well, if you define integrity as supporting election fraud, making deceitful statements, insulting the grassroots and trying to alienate progressives from the Democratic Party, then I guess integrity is your strong suit. If you define a dog as an animal that meows, then my cat is a dog. But words do have meaning beyond the ones we give them.

            You might want to look up the difference between “hate” and “contempt”. I will freely admit to the latter towards you and your colleagues who are working hard to destroy the Democratic Party by alienating it from the grassroots.

            As for my identity, I told you, ask Eric. Or is he no longer taking your phone calls?

          • Steven Maviglio

            Don’t flatter yourself. I do find it fascinating that you won’t provide your name. That about says it all about your integrity, or lack thereof.

          • Marga

            You find it fascinating that I won’t respond to your little tantrum demand that I give you my surname? I told you how you could *easily* find out. If you don’t want to do the work, too bad.

            Anyone else interested can ask me or they can read through my many previous comments and figure out who I am and what I stand for.

          • Steven Maviglio

            Who would waste their time? So many spelling mistakes, inaccuracies, and insults in just about every post. Boring too.

          • Marga

            How many hours have you spent trying to troll me here? I’m guessing I’m right and Bauman won’t return your calls. Wow!

          • Steven Maviglio

            You haven’t been right about anything in your previous rants. Why start now?

          • Marga

            And that just confirms it. 🙂

          • Steven Maviglio

            Have a pleasant evening with your cat.

          • Marga

            Thanks! It’s my daughter’s cat, actually, and he does like to lie around while my husband and I watch House of Cards. Which character in the show do you most identify with?

          • Lauren Steiner

            That’s right, put being in a little clique like a political party over principles. I hope Bernie leaves the corrupt Democratic Party and starts a People’s Party. He could end the Democratic Party as we know it if he did, seeing as he is the most popular politician in America. And I voted for Ralph over Gore as well. Ralph has been fighting corporations and the 1% long before the Democratic Party started soliciting money from them. Gore didn’t even have the balls to fight for the election that was stolen from him like Kimberly is. Oh, and the former ED of Friends of the Earth told me Gore did zip for the environment when he was a congressman, senator and VP. Another phony progressive like Boss Bauman.

          • Steven Maviglio

            Hilarious!

          • @Dan Chmielewski

            Bernie is not a Democrat. Lauren, doesn’t it bother you Bernie won’t report his campaign finances from 2016 to the FEC? How do you think his wife will do with the FBI investigation into bank fraud. Write to him and ask at one of his three homes. Gore launched a significant legal challenge to the 2000 results which the Supreme Court ruled on. Vore’s record on the environment is far greater than anything Bernie’s done.

          • Lauren Steiner

            Uh, no, it ‘aint. 1. I would like to see the tax returns, yes. 2. I think Jane may have misheard the amount of the financial commitments some donors made to the college or was overly optimistic about raising more. Even her board members chalk it up as inexperience rathe than fraud. 3. His “three homes” is a Republican talking point. Shame on you! Most senators have three homes if not more. He has a place in Vermont and one in DC; and the vacation home was one they bought when they sold a vacation home his wife had. All these homes are modest and inexpensive in value. You both are obviously seething that Bernie is the most popular politician in America and that he got cheered on the unity tour whereas Perez got booed. Also, I recorded the three minutes of cheering when Fiona Ma mentioned Bernie at the CADEM17 last session. There was barely a titter when Hillary’s name was mentioned.

          • @Dan Chmielewski

            Most popular politician in America? The bar ain’t that high. His D.C. Townhouse is modest and still worth a million. House on Lake Champlain is pricey too. Jane “misheard”…. ha! It looks like she falsified documents. http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/332313-fbi-investigating-jane-sanders-for-alleged-bank-fraud-report
            Time Magazine says he’s a de facto millionaire. http://time.com/money/4235986/bernie-sanders-millionaire-finances/
            And then there’s the big FU on his 2016 campaign filings. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/bernie-sanders-not-file-2016-finances-article-1.2756267

            Not a lot of unity on the Unity Tour. So the Democratic Party, in your view, is corrupt, but Bernie is not? Hail Hydra Lauren.

          • Lauren Steiner

            Dan, I want to thank you for these comments. As a known Bauman supporter, you are serving as his surrogate in this thread. By repeating these Republican talking points about Bernie, you prove what we Berners have long known, that Bauman hates Bernie and his supporters. I am screenshotting your comments and sharing them with our group. So like the national unity tour, there will be no unity under Bauman. You all should have realized that Kimberly Ellis was the true unity candidate in the race bringing together Bernie and Hillary supporters. So good on you.

          • @Dan Chmielewski

            I voted to endorse Eric at the DPOC Meeting because I think he was the best candidate for the job. I speak for myself. Eric doesn’t need anyone to speak for him. And Bauman certainly does not hate Bernie supporters.
            The points I have made about Bernie Sanders are not Republican talking points but documented facts (did you even look at the links? All reputable media). Please do share these links with your group. We do need to unify as a party and Bauman offered Ellis a seat at the table; with every day that passes, she divides us further. And, in my opinion, diminishes her role in shaping the party.
            Like Trump, Bernie was elected with the support of the NRA; Like Trump, Bernie has shady ties to Russia and thinks Russian collusion isn’t that important; like Trump, Bernie refused to release his tax returns or documents that reflect his net worth. Like Trump, Bernie called Hillary corrupt. Like Trump, Bernie can’t get past losing to a woman by millions of votes. But Bernie does Trump one better, because his wife is under FBI investigation for bank fraud for possibly falsifying documents. And it appears Trump is not under FBI Investigation (yet).
            I used to coach kids 6-12) in baseball, soccer and basketball. Both boys and girls. I always taught them to be modest in victory and hold you’re head up when you lose. Carry yourself with grace. Thus far, Eric is and Kimberly is not. You aren’t either.

          • Lauren Steiner

            Thanks for the additional smears about Bernie. You are just digging yourself deeper.

          • @Dan Chmielewski

            Sunshine is the best disinfectant. Have another cup of Bernie Kool-aid

            I don’t care about your Bernie group. Denial is not just a river in Egypt for you

          • Lauren Steiner

            You are a communications consultant and that is your idea of a rebuttal?

          • Lauren Steiner

            EDF and NRDC are the biggest sell-out Big Green groups that have frackers on their boards, for God’s sake. And if you were an environmentalist, you would have divested yourself of that oil stock.

          • Steven Maviglio

            Love the purity test. So should Bernie sell all three of his houses too so he can no longer be part of the 1%?

          • Lauren Steiner

            He is not part of the 1%. His net worth is less than what it takes to be in the 1%. And thanks for revealing your true self by using that Republican talking point.

          • Steven Maviglio

            I guess MONEY magazine is a “Republican talking point”? Good luck with that People’s Party.

  • Joel Block

    Steve Maviglio: With all due respect, please disclose who is paying you now and in the immediate past so readers may properly evaluate your article in context? It was reported on May 23 by the San Jose Mercury News that you were hired May 21 by the California Democratic Party. http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/05/23/fight-over-the-california-democratic-party-chairmanship-continues-with-ballot-review-underway-tuesday/

    Is that true? Are you still being paid by the Democratic Party? Did Eric Bauman employ you? Were you given instructions to use Party money to attack Party Delegates like myself?

    FYI, I did not campaign for anyone in the Chair election. I cast a vote as a Proxy pursuant to written instructions of the Delegate. I am only reporting what I saw first-hand.

    As a retired labor attorney and former labor leader, I have attended plenty of conventions, can read and understand Bylaw and Rules provisions and am familiar with Roberts Rules of Order.

    • Steven Maviglio

      Nobody is paying me. The views are my own. Your attempt at personal character assassination is pretty sad, actually. If you were familiar with the CDP Bylaws, then you would not have written your essay that had zero foundation in fact.

      • Joel Block

        Steve: I merely asked you relevant questions which would help readers understand the context in which to evaluate your article. I simply ask: who is paying for your services these days? This is a reasonable question. You find this simple question to be “personal character assassination.” Why?

        You answered that nobody is paying you. Does that mean you are an unemployed communications consultant? I find that hard to believe, with your extended resume as “Head Honcho” (your words, not mine) of your company, Forza Communications. http://www.forzacommunications.com

        So please Steve, just disclose who is paying you. The views may be yours, but are you communicating them while being a paid spokesperson for a client? You were reported by a reputable publication, the San Jose Mercury News, to have been hired by the Democratic Party the night Eric Bauman assumed the powers of Chairperson. Are you denying that? If so, just say it.

        But please don’t interpret a reasonable inquiry as a “personal character assassination.” Only you can accomplish that with your own actions and words.

        Finally, you claim that my column “had zero foundation in fact.” Please point out any specific factual errors and I will be happy to address your concerns.

        • Steven Maviglio

          As indicated earlier, the views here are my own, not anyone that I do work for. No one is paying me to express my personal opinion. Not sure what about that you don’t get. As for your post, the above is my respond to charges of “secret meetings” (which the CDP posted pictures of — so not so secret) and the other absurdities and voting, counting, and ballot review.

  • LFOldTimer

    What a clown circus. Thanks for the laugh.

    Will Rogers once said it perfectly:

    “I am not a member of any organized political party — I am a Democrat.”