Notes from Aug 21 Meeting – Should Democrats Endorse Anti-Choice Candidates?

The meeting was called to order just after 7pm at the Aja Project building in City Heights.

Officers present:
Susan Peinado, President
Ramla Sahid, Vice President
Becca Fielding-Miller, Secretary
Emily Bonner, Immediate Past President

• Ruth Rollins and Susan Peinado introduce two new members
• Ramla Sahid moves to approve meeting agenda, motion passes with no additions.
• Susan Peinado requests and receives permission to livestream club meeting

Elected report:
• Doug Case for Toni Atkins, speaks on affordable housing crisis. Three bills have passed the Senate and are currently in the assembly. Senator Atkins bill, SB2, would create a permanent funding source for affordable housing via a $75 fee on certain types of real estate transactions. Expected to raise $250 million per year. SB3, will be on November 2018 ballot, is a $3 billion bond to ford affordable housing throughout the state. SB1 would streamline process of approval for affordable housing.

Candidates speak:
• Pierre Beauregard, Congressional District 50
• Ammar Campa-Najar, Congressional District 50
• Daniel Schmiekowski, San Diego City Council District 2
• Patrick McFarland, Chula Vista City Council District 2
• Michelle Krug for Doug Applegate, Congressional District 49
• Bryan Pease, San Diego City Council District 2
• Alice Pipken-Allen for Ken Marlborough, County Board of Supervisors District 4
• Jordan Beane, San Diego City Council District 2
• Dominic Nguyen for Dave Myers, Sherriff – Endorsed by County Party
• Genevieve Jones-Wright, County District Attorney – Endorsed by County Party
• Paul Kerr, Congressional District 49, introduces himself to club members

Discussion:
Should the Democratic party endorse anti-abortion/anti-choice/pro-life candidates? Should abortion be a litmus test?

  • Mattingly of San Diego State discusses different terminology used around abortion within the political realm (anti-abortion, anti-choice, pro-life, pro-birth, etc…) and shares some of the historical and political context of the debate.
Yes No AND
Christian argument: True pro-life policies include social and economic support for women and children that reduce unwanted abortion. Banning abortion will not reduce it. It’s a question of priorities in red states: If we don’t appeal to independents in red states, we won’t win elections. For a lot of independents, choice/abortion is an important issue. There are Democrats who are anti-choice, but it’s not their most important issue
Of course we want the swing vote, but why does it have to come at the expense of women? There are lots of swing issues that aren’t choice. We don’t want to preclude Republicans from changing their minds and voting for Democrats We also have to look at pro-woman issues/issues of reproductive justice that disproportionately affect women of color.
We shouldn’t back down on our Democratic values to win. Just because you’re pro-choice doesn’t mean you’re pro-reproductive justice. Lots of pro-choice candidates for policies that harm women of color’s ability to parent their children in safety and without state persecution and violence.

The Democratic party is just as complicit in the targeting and surveillance of communities of color, that’s not pro-life.

A candidate’s personal values are irrelevant, their job is to obey the law and the law has decided that abortion is legal. When we just talk one issue, and ignore how these issues intersect, we lose votes.
Roe may still be in place, but there are dozens of state-level laws across the country that limit access and affect poor women, rural women, young women, and women of color the most. This is not an elitist issue. Your access to abortion is not at risk if you have money. People aren’t not voting for Democrats because abortion. We need to look at the real reasons why poor women and people of color aren’t going to the polls.
Anti-abortion candidates push women back. We refuse to go back and would never vote for somebody who will send our rights backwards.
We believe in freedom of religion as a fundamental principle of our government. There is no place to impose religious values as part of the legislative agenda.
Women are the backbone of the Democratic party and abandoning our civil rights for votes is a slap in the face to the people who get candidates elected in the first place.

Vice President Ramla Sahid motions to vote on proposed resolution, with amendments, at next meeting. The amended resolution will be sent out with two weeks notice. Motion passes on a hand-vote. The vote will be on the agenda for the 9/18 meeting.

Officer reports:
• Secretary: Will be going out on maternity leave shortly.
• VP:
o Update on grassroots affordable housing efforts in San Diego.
o Climate action campaign has a new podcast called Flip The Script, the Future is Female. Find it on itunes or twitter: @FlipTheScriptSD

New Business:
• Parisa Ijadi-Maghsoodi speaks on urging San Diego to deconcentrate poverty by keeping an Obama-era desegregation rule via Section 8. Trump has suspended this rule, but cities have the option to keep complying. Learn more at http://www.UrbDeZine.com (https://sandiego.urbdezine.com/2017/08/16/trumps-suspension-obamas-de-segregation-policy-impacts-san-diego-housing-vouchers/)
• Kevin Beiser has requested an early endorsement vote at the 9/18 meeting.
• Western Service Workers speak on the need to press for water as a human right in San Diego, where thousands of people are having their water shut off which is creating a public health and human rights crisis.

Upcoming events:
• September 11th: Scott Peters will be hosting an event on reproductive justice and the politics of women’s health. 6:15 pm at Democratic Party Headquarters. RSVP to ScottPeters.com/choice
• November 2nd: Flip the Script women’s lunch. Featuring very awesome keynote speaker to be announced. 11:30am at Jacob’s Center for Neighborhood Innovation
• Happy Hour with Indivisible and other local progressive groups TBD. Keep an eye on our website/facebook/twitter!

See you all next month, September 18 at 7pm!

One thought on “Notes from Aug 21 Meeting – Should Democrats Endorse Anti-Choice Candidates?

Leave a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s