Turn about is Fair Play

SEANC endorsed quite a few people in the primaries, on both sides of the aisle as there are members of SEANC who are Republicans and Democrats. I helped someone who was endorsed to run in a primary.

It is my understanding that the Board made the decision not to endorse in the General Election because there was no progress made on the State Health Plan management or collective bargaining but to get the whole story you will need to invite the SEANC President to come here and answer.

SEANC did not endorse any particular new leadership or campaign for new leadership that I know of. Individual members may have and they have that right as individuals. SEANC members have a right to be unhappy when their issues are not addressed.

They did decide to endorse ELAINE MARSHALL, a DEMOCRAT, for SENATE. She is someone who has been an outspoken voice on SEANC issues.

By sitting out, SEANC now has a lot of money for 2012 and can once again endorse for the leadership they want. SEANC is issue-driven not party driven.

Invite SEANC here to speak in a live forum and let them formally engage these questions. This is an area for the NCDP Chair to work on. There needs to be a meeting of the minds.

Again, ask SEANC to come on here and have a discussion with them. I don't speak for them; I just supported a primary candidate.

Holliman’s defeat allows new leaders to emerge. Leaders that can stop protecting Blue Cross and Blue Shield’s no-bid, sweetheart health plan contract and make the health plan more efficient,” said SEANC Executive Director Dana Cope.

I doubt Dana Cope or SEANC knew the House would go Republican when they made the decision to take out Holliman. I don't recall many predicting that outcome. As you can see the Holliman decision was about the State Health Plan, an issue important to SEANC.

So the State Employee you are married to is a member of SEANC and a contributor to their PAC? Then, your spouse would be able to speak up about the process SEANC uses and discuss with district representatives any concerns about the process or the running of the organization directly. Yes?

I worked with a candidate that ran against an incumbent but SEANC did not "run" him - he is a state employee and member but he determined that he would run on his own. He naturally got the endorsement because he is a long time member of SEANC. Not really aware of SEANC going out and recruiting anyone since they have a non-biased process of endorsement and take no action until their endorsed candidates are selected however individual members of SEANC and state employees in general concerned about their issues did encourage people to run and they should just as anyone else should so.

Some SEANC members wanted to defeat an incumbent, Ronnie Sutton, and finally did so in a primary this time around. Not every Elected Official had something to do with Blue Cross and Health Plan but every elected official who is a Democrat had a mouth to speak up on the issue, introduce bills, persuade and advocate. I think that can be said of Sutton and many others.

Dana Cope as the leader is for the Board there to consider. There is a process for that too.

Not sure the polling showed the House Democrats losing. As far as reading the paper and watching tv and walking out the front door, the NC First Party is an endeavor of SEIU and they did not get the signatures, according to the newspapers, and will try again in 2012. that was tied to Congressional issues. So, maybe then those members will worry about their chair but in the meantime some SEANC members are Democrats and have as much right to worry about the Chair as an other Democrat especially if they are on the Executive Committee. Not every SEANC member will choose to be a member of the NC First Party should it become a Party. Being a member of a group like SEANC does not erase the rights as individuals registered to a Party or preclude them from worrying about who may be the leader to help bring factions together which is why the question was posed.

In Durham, there is a feeling of repurcussions because SEANC endorsed someone over the incumbent and that certain House members now hold that against state employees. So, a fair question to pose to someone running for NCDP Chair.

a list of the Demcorats from last session who took action/advocated/did something on behalf of state employees who should have received an endorsement and funding because their efforts aligned with the issues in which SEANC members are concerned. I will then write Dana Cope and ask about them specifically and whether or not they were discussed in the Board Meeting when it was determined that there would be no endorsements. BTW, if I had been in that meeting, I would not have advocated that position, but in the cases of the primaries, I think the decisions were solid and with great merit. I will then post the response I receive from Dana Cope and the Board.

I believe in primaries because a choice is never a bad option and 100+ years of power leads SOME to believe they are entitled to seats. The Republicans had many primaries and it did not stop them so Democrats, the Party of diversity, should be proud to see primaries and not just fight to protect their own exclusive club against newcomers in primaries.

And you can check your spouse's payroll deductions to see if a PAC contribution is given and whether one is provided to SEIU. Those are the two places where the money is spent.

and have a great holiday season and new year!

I will inquire. I think the list is pretty short. I did check around and found no one who predicted the GOP would take the House except GOP pollsters and John Davis. So, I think there was a lot of shock on that one and not just SEANC.

2011 will prove interesting.

When I looked back at the statewide polling data for the general, I saw the predictions on the NC Senate but it looked like we would hold the House. Let's remember, SEANC worked pretty hard on some Democratic primaries trying to get Democrats in on their issues. I don't recall any Republican races where they were working it.

I agree the difference will be painfully obvious, however, I do not correlate "sitting out" endorsements with not understanding or being naive about politics and parties. Sitting out is sitting out and some of the Democrats in the House should have worked it for the endorsements but they took SEANC for granted, perhaps (?) and some like to say that if SEANC endorsements (shorthand for $$) had been provided, there would have been different outcomes in some races. My take on that is then go find the $4k from another contributor.

Many SEANC members will tell you the "old" leadership wasn't very accomodating to SEANC issues and some "leadership" were downright antagonistic.

If they had been accomdating, on even one issue - pick one, we may not be here debating why SEANC did not do endorsements which frankly is the business of its members. I don't see anyone debating whether or not Duke Energy should give out its PAC money and whether they are to blame for not giving enough money. That's right because they gave it to both sides of the aisle to cut their losses and ensure an "in" with either side that may win.

Different approaches. Only those who give to a PAC can truly debate the wisdom of their decision. It is, after all their money.

Certainly, legislators have responsibility for MANY issues. And there are MANY constituent groups looking at those issues, some who gave contributions and some that did not. And SEANC members work across state government in jobs affecting all of those other issues.

THE BCBS "deal" is not just about state employees, it is a budget issue about which all taxpayers should be concerned. Most people have certain expectations about their employers. Public service employees are no different. It's just much juicier, as a legislator, to proclaim you are the steward of K-12 education than to say you helped a state employee provide health care to his two children.

Frankly, the BCBS deal may be one issue where the "new" leadership is accomodating. They may recognize that it is not brilliant to run the health plan in the legislature and that it needs to be more cost effective. What will everyone say then?

Some people who have children do not have health care coverage now because of the cost and the former leadership did not correct that matter for many, many years.

The Governor has put the only proposal out there which "looks" to have employee cuts in it at this point and she is a Democrat and former member of the Democratic leadership in the Senate. Have not seen a cut package from the new leadership yet.

I agree James. I wonder why people had to jump in on an innocent blogger posing a question of a candidate for NCDP Chair. Golly. It is the process, isn't it? All I see is a couple of people worried how a PAC uses its money.

Well here's a big hug for you for the holidays :)

I'm a lover not a fighter.

This has been a long discussion, but let me add one more thing. I just want to share that I am a state employee, SEANC member and SEANC-PAC contributor, who happened to win the Democratic Party nomination to the NC Senate District 15 this year against a Republican incumbent, Neal Hunt.

Based on encouraging words in the spring of 2009 from SEANC leadership, along with other motivating factors, I entered the race that led to my being the nominee. I endorsed all the SEANC legislative priorities, including collective bargaining.

As a clearly progressive candidate, I did get the endorsement of the AFL-CIO and other groups, yet SEANC denied me a chance to even interview and told me the denial of endorsements for legislative candidates included me. No exceptions. But I'm in the SEANC family and carrying the SEANC flag, what gives? It was an over-the-top move that threw the baby out with the bathwater.

was already scheduled when SEANC made the announcement they weren't going to endorse anybody, so I went anyway and answered their questions. I felt like that was part of my job as a candidate to learn as much as I could about state issues.

While in retrospect, my seat certainly looks unwinnable, I think more people than me thought I had a chance. Part of my district is Burke County, and I think they are currently third in the number of state employees. While it's all water under the bridge now, I remain perplexed as to how SEANC thinks it helped itself with this strategy.

Beth Jones

Mr. Malone's comment is the best representation of why many Dems are bitter about SEANC's lack of action in the past election cycle. Similar sentiments are widespread (though by no means unanimous) among the Democratic establishment (even among state employees' staunchest supporters), so repairing the relationship will certainly be a two-way street.

Also, there was one NCGA member who received a post-primary check from SEANC. His name is Nelson Dollar.

http://www.seanc.org/docs/legupdate/20e5bd81-ed4e-4670-9a69-6e54e03c902a...

shows the Dollar was supportive along with two others on some health plan issues and some SEANC Board Members have said he has attended many events but a check after the fact??? We need SEANC on here to explain that one. And whether or not any others got after the election checks. Now, again, that practice is also used by other PACs and I don't see anyone on here jumping up and down over those groups ... but this needs an explanation.

I did not run for the Senate just because SEANC encouraged me to run in spring of 2009. I met with the leaders at SEANC headquarters and they told me $4000 was the amount I would likely get, especially because of me being a state employee and being in favor of collective bargaining. "We would be honored to support you," were the exact words. In July of 2010, just two days before my scheduled interview, and Sen. Hunt's on the same night--we were told SEANC was not endorsing anyone.

Yes, my candidacy was a long-shot and I realize some PAC's factor in the viability of a campaign, no matter the issues. I was victim of this in regard to some environmental PACs despite my 100% support for their priorities. They thought Hunt would win and went with him, just to be able to get one or two good votes out of him. Tough and practical, if not principled. SEANC sent me green light signals for over a year and then popped up a red one with three months to go in the campaign. But as Dr. Beth said, it's water under the bridge now. Live and learn.