The Democratic National Committee (DNC) Platform Committee is holding a series of (pseudo-)public hearings this week en route formalizing the Platform. Amid the reality and necessity of tRump’s mismanagement of Coronavirus response, these hearings reasonably are being held online. “(Pseudo-)hearings” as these are scripted events with no active public comments and engagement other than the chance to submit videos for DNC consideration with between-the-lines implications that what is really wanted are paeans to the DNC’s perspicacity and brilliance rather than actual comments seeking to fill gaps and strengthen the platform.
Here, for example, are real-time outraged thoughts of California DNC representative RL Miller:
this is outrageous. DNC sent me (as a member-elect) an email telling me about the YouTube broadcasts, including one today on “building back better,” on 4.5 hours notice. They are separately doing a digital engagement campaign in which people are invited to submit videos… but my sense of things is that the platform committee folk are not obligated to listen to the videos, and instead the DNC will select “yay Dems, the platform is awesome” videos to broadcast at convention.
Miller is, among many other accomplishments, the founder of Climate Hawks Vote and thus let’s turn to climate.
The first day of DNC Platform hearings went a full three hours. Not a single one of the seemingly screened and scripted presenters nor any of the committee members used the word ‘climate’. That pesky little oh-by-the-way climate emergency ‘pet issue’ wasn’t worthy of a syllable of discussion. (Contrast that with the Pelosi led press conference on the release of the House Climate Committee’s over 500-page climate plan earlier today.) Of course, that was only one day of three day of hearings …or, well, three of nine scheduled hours. Thus, like presidential debates, we can always hold our breaths in the hopes that climate might make a sneak and surprise entry into the discussion.
Now, amid the ever-spirally SNAFU (situation normal, all f*cked up) of the Age Of Trump, why should anyone care about the Party platform. After all, what ‘really’ matters is Biden’s campaign platform and, even more so, the personnel our next president choosing to surround him. Right?
Actually, the platform does matter — as do discussions leading up to it. This is signaling as to what ‘the’ party and party elites care about (and what they believe the voting public believes). This is messaging about what will — and won’t — be fought for in the coming years. And, the documents can be read and cited in many debates and discussions for the coming four years.
As DNC member and chair of the DNC Council on the Environment and Climate Crisis Michelle Deatrick put it in an email,
I understand the frustration with the process–believe me, I really do. I’ve been a DNC member for almost four years.
Truly, it all matters. We can walk and chew gum at the same time: platform and personnel both matter. That’s why I’ve spent the last seven months working to impact the platform. I can speak (and have, to Emily Atkin) from personal experience as a former elected official about the difference the national party platform makes at the local government level. A platform can be a tool for advocating for more progressive policy; conversely, it can be an excuse for regressive or stagnant policy. This platform will not be revised for four years. It will percolate “down” over those four years, and will impact state and even county Democratic Party platforms–meaning it will impact the framework for conversation, the understanding of what is possible, demands on local and state-level elected leaders, and even the environmental and climate literacy of Democratic voters. For example, the fact that the Council’s recommendations include the concept of near zero is sparking conversations among the 95% of Democrats who are unfamiliar with the term. So yes, the platform matters, and in many ways that are not all that visible.
Now, let’s be clear, the draft DNC climate platform is far ahead of what was being proposed a decade ago. And, to be clear, it would have been inadequate against the challenge even then and falls abysmally short of both what is required and what is possible today. A tiny illustrative example:
Democrats share a deep commitment to tackling the climate challenge; creating millions of good-paying middle class jobs; reducing greenhouse gas emissions more than 80 percent below 2005 levels by 2050;
No, “80 percent below 2005 levels by 2050” just doesn’t cut it.
Let’s contrast that with the goals the House released today:
The Climate Crisis Action Plan would put the country on a path to net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, if not earlier.
Hmmm … DNC Platform Committee, when it comes to climate, it is past time to up your game. You could start by showing, in the remaining public (pseudo-)hearings, that you care about addressing the climate emergency by having thoughtful and substantive discussions of climate.