Nevada teachers union challenges Democratic caucus rules (A Socialist POV)

[IndianaGreen]

Nevada teachers union challenges Democratic caucus rules
By Kate Randall
14 January 2008

The legal challenge is thoroughly undemocratic on its face and would serve to disenfranchise thousands of shift workers who would be unable to leave work to participate in the caucuses, scheduled to take place at noon next Saturday, January 19. Although the new plan for delegate selection was adopted in final form last September, it was not until Obama gained the Culinary Workers’ endorsement that the NSEA filed suit.

While the caucus system is inherently undemocratic—discriminating against voters who are unable to leave work to participate—the NSEA suit does not challenge the system as a whole. It merely seeks to strike down that aspect of the caucusing that would detrimentally affect Hillary Clinton’s chances to win.

<snip>

However, the Clinton campaign has clear connections to the lawsuit. The NSEA is employing a law firm—Kummer, Kaempfer, Bonner, Renshaw and Ferrario—that has close ties to the New York senator. An attorney at the firm, former Nevada Democratic congressman James H. Bilbray, has endorsed Clinton and is campaigning for her in the state. Also, NSEA Deputy Executive Director Debbie Cahill was a founding member of Clinton’s Nevada Women’s Leadership Council.

<snip>

Culinary Workers Union Local 226 Secretary-Treasurer D. Taylor said, “This is an attempt to disenfranchise people who are largely women, largely people of color, and people who do the kind of work that makes this town go.” Taylor accused the NSEA of “tactics that are like those the Republicans use to suppress minority votes in Florida.”

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/jan2008/neva-j14.shtml

[ursi]

1. Hillary Clinton - the Divider

[aquart]

2. So a caucus system based on employment IS inherently democratic?

Because workers caucusing with coworkers and supervisors will never or hardly ever be intimidated into acquiescence? Because no one is bothered that a Culinary Union worker was bragging that union workers will not be divided? So if you prefer Edwards or Clinton...maybe best to keep quiet?

And how is it "inherently democratic" to provide special caucus sites ONLY at union casinos but not for non-union casinos? That doesn't weight the union worker's vote higher?

HOW is a perfectly legal challenge "undemocratic"?