Want Change? Start at Grassroots

"Days after his favored candidates lost an intense primary fight, Assemblyman Jerry Green said he no longer wants to be chairman of the city's Democratic Party and will not seek re-election at Monday's reorganization meeting."

So read the opening sentence of an article I wrote nearly ten years ago before retiring as a reporter. Green's hiatus did not last long, and in 2013 he faces not only re-election to his Assembly seat but also the biennial election of the 68-member Democratic City Committee and his re-election as chairman of the party.

Over his long tenure, Green has only faced two serious challenges to his chairmanship. Former Mayor Harold Mitchell fielded a slate of committee candidates in 1989 and won enough seats to take the chairmanship, but chose not to do so. Mayor Albert T. McWilliams got a majority of supporters on the committee in 2003 and did take the chairmanship, but was dumped by Democratic higher-ups in 2005.
(Correct me if senescence made me get the dates wrong.)

With all the grumbling about control of the party, no one has since attempted a coup. So what would it take?

Of the 68 seats, only 14 have been held by the same Regular Democrats in 2007, 2009 and 2011. The only serious challengers, the New Democrats, had just seven candidates who won the same seats in all three years. The "churn," or turnover in the majority of seats, may indicate an opening for newcomers who want to attain these most grass-roots elective offices.

Candidates, a male and female for each of the city's 34 voting districts in four wards, must file in April and winners in the June primary theoretically pick the chairman at the party reorganization on the Monday following the primary. Those in charge tend to keep an eye on who picks up petitions to file for the primary and also take into account the past voting history of districts in forming a strategy to retain power. New Democrats have traditionally done better in the Second and Third wards than in the First and Fourth wards, so their challenge is to pick up more support in the latter if they want to prevail.

There is talk of a new population in the city that wants to invest in its future with a progressive outlook, in contrast to what is perceived as traditional party control through patronage and mediocrity in government. This faction may choose to align itself with the New Dems or could attempt an independent movement, but if serious about change, they will have to start aligning voters to their cause immediately. Within each district, like-minded individuals would have to be identified and persuaded not just to grumble, but to rumble - talk up the desire for change to neighbors, garner support and get out the vote on June 4.

One of the arguments for incumbents is stability and retention of positive links to party power on all higher levels. An argument against entrenched local power is almost the same - there can be no new blood without party permission, which leads to co-option and stasis.

Whatever people say they want, there is no substitute for organizing. Politicians here tend to keep the population divided by harping on class and race divisions. Those who envision one Plainfield based on a desire for growth across the city will have to inspire fellow residents to see the same thing and work toward it, or else be resigned to the status quo in 2013.

--Bernice