So let me tell you a story about the College Democrats. For all the people who disparage our youth, this is a group that we should admire regardless of the side of the aisle we are on. I have gotten to know a lot of the College Democrats and consider a number of them to be personal friends. They are dedicated, hard working, and very active in building their club and their cause. Moreover, I have entrusted two of them to be sitting board members for the Vanguard.
So the Vanguard gave the College Democrats money to distribute brochures around town. The College Democrats are now using that money to be able to go to a California Young Democrats Lake Tahoe retreat in a few weeks. So the Vanguard got the services of these dedicated workers and now the club is able to afford to send their members to a retreat where they will be involved in training workshops, networking, and listening to various speakers. A pretty good deal for both sides.
Well let me tell you, the first weekend we did it was the weekend of May 1. Some may remember that weekend as the weekend when it rained the entire weekend, at times heavily. Still, these College Democrats walked for hours, 10 to 15 of them in the rain until they were soaked and we finally called it a weekend when the brochures became unrecognizable.
We tried it again two weeks later, this time, they braved not the rain, but 100 degree plus heat. And again, they labored for hours in the heat dropping brochures.
We got about half the town covered. We were going to finish up this fall, but once that certain columnist raised a fuss, we decided to redesign the brochures.
The bottom line for me is that yes, they received money in exchange for their work, but they also showed a good deal of dedication and perseverance. They performed the work not just because they got paid but because they believed in the cause that they were performing.
People ought to make up their mind on Measure P based on any number of issues, however this should not be one of them as many campaigns these days rely on paid work. By way of example, many of the workers for Obama were paid, that does not mean they were any less dedicated to his cause nor does it mean they did not believe and support Obama.
Perhaps the columnist should have contacted the students and interviewed them to see why they are working on this particular project. But that of course would require actual work and checking of facts. No wonder young people don’t want to get involved in politics, they have to deal with this kind of cynical crap from their elders.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
David with due respect, you are biased on this subject. It is difficult for you to be objective.
To me the paid use of the student group is just one more unpalatable part of this project. Alone not a seal breaker but together with all the rest, yes. Would the students have worked for No on P? Will they hire out for any cause or for both sides if a cause ?
The brochure came yesterday and that again seemed disengenuous, a tree hugger, come on!
Fraid it’s no for me.
And I’m not biased on any other subject? I’m sorry, I disagree with you. Obama used paid organizers. The Vanguard used paid student groups. What’s the difference? Pick a real issue. If you disagree with brochure, attack the brochure!
1. Which one is it, “I” or “the Vanguard”? You sound like an insane person.
2. Please do not compare yourself (or “the Vanguard”) to Obama. There is no resemblance. At all.
3. With language like, “they braved not the rain, but 100 degree plus heat” you would think they were roofers carrying buckets of hot tar across the city instead of college democrats carrying flyers door-to-door.
4. “No one wonder young people don’t want to get involved in politics, they have to deal with this kind of cynical crap.” Really David? If they were on the other side of your amateur rants and righteous indignation they would feel just as talked down to. “You” or “the Vanguard” are just as (if not a great deal more) obnoxious as Bob Dunning.
Young people getting involved in their community is quite refreshing. If they are getting paid or not does not matter the fact is that they find the time to learn the issues and make a decision to care and get involved in their community. That is more than what can be said for a lot of adults who simply like to complain and not do any work.
Bravo to the College Democrats who have been active in the community for years registering voters and helping out at Democratic events in the community and actually doing work and going on to become good leaders. We need more people like you.
College Democrats don’t let some fussy columnist bring you down. You are supporting a good project and you got some publicity out of it. Run with it and keep your head up.
Lesson learned: Don’t be like the fussy drab columnist who has to make an issue out of a non issue. Do your research and get the facts.
Josh: For the sake of accuracy I did not compare myself or the Vanguard to Obama. I simply used Obama as a well-known example of the practice of using paid canvassers. It’s an inexpensive way to get reliable workers. I found it very valuable.
BTW, I think you still owe me lunch.
David,
I thoroughly enjoyed reading the other Vanguard article written by Thomas Jue and Jerold Theis this morning. Student fee hikes to the tune of $203 million!! That is outrageous! And, we have a whining columnist in the Enterprise attacking young people for earning money by delivering literature in precincts around town to earn money. Can someone say, “next?” It must be a slow news day in downtown Davis.
Sorry folks but I am with David on this one.
More people should applaud their work. For most of these Young Democrats this is the one and only time they will ever be paid for actual work. Most of them have plans to spend the rest of their lives being paid by the government…
P smells funny.
When you say Obama did one thing and then the Vanguard did the same thing, that’s a comparison.
I’ll take the old David Greenwald to lunch (or even good ol’ Doug Paul Davis), but I don’t like the new, humorless David Greenwald: Dark Knight of Liberal Justice.
Did the College Dems vote to endorse the ballot measure?
What if these kids were paid by Whitcomb to hand out flyers in support of Covell Village IV? How would you feel then, DPD? Any problem with that? I think your extreme bias in favor of Measure P is showing.
So let’s talk merits. Facts about WHR/Measure P –
1) Average price of WHR townhouses touted by developers as being “affordable” are $450,000. To call that price “affordable workforce housing” is laughable.
2) Most of the low income affordable housing units will have a rent set at $1000 – $1200 per month. This is not “affordable” by any stretch of the imagination for low income folks.
3) The WHR project is so dense, there are no yards for children to play in. Parents must send their kids over to the orchard to play.
4) 90% GHG emissions is a bit of a stretch, since it does not include car emissions from all the vehicles that will be driven in and out of this housing complex.
5) We already have plenty of housing (foreclosures, West Village and other infill developments coming along), and certainly don’t need anymore in this abysmal economy.
6) After 15 years, the WHR project is going to be a net fiscal negative in regard to the cost of city services.
7) Measure P proponents have printed patently false claims that this housing is “affordable” when it is clearly not; that there is no net fiscal negative to the city, but millions of dollars in surplus to be used for city services.
8) The solar panels to make the units energy efficient are making the housing too expensive.
9) Very flawed political process to move this project ahead of all others on HESC list (WHR was way down on the list), that has not allowed commissions to weigh in and truly analyze this project thoroughly, vetting it so problems can be corrected and allow for better and more informed citizen input.
10) A vote for Measure P will give developers the message that to lie/overinflate claims on campaign literature is the way to go – it works.
Frankly, I don’t see much in the way of substantive arguments to vote Yes on Measure P –
1) Inflated false claims the project is “affordable”.
2) A vote against Measure P is a vote against Measure J. One has absolutely nothing to do with the other.
3) This project will set the bar in reducing GHG emissions for all other projects. I doubt it. Many of us are not “greenies” and could care less about this nonsense, especially if it makes housing unaffordable.
4) A vote for this project will deter Covell Village IV from being brought forward – ha, ha, ha. Covell Village IV will move forward like the juggernaut it is, no matter whether Measure P is defeated or not.
These young college kids were sucked into a campaign, not fully understanding all the issues at stake, bc they were paid by Parlin and company (Bill Ritter). How is that a laudable thing?
David… you labeled this “Commentary” and are entitled to your spin. What you left out of the discussion is that the point being made about the paid volunteers is NOT what bad young people they are but rather that it is important to note that the Parlin campaign CANNOT muster any citizens of Davis who are willing to VOLUNTEER, without pay, to work for the WHR project, unlike the NO on measure P campaign. As one of the untold thousands of unpaid volunteers who worked for an Obama victory, I am quite bothered by your attempt to somehow equate the Obama campaign and the Parlin WHR campaign in this regard.
Let’ see if we can summarize this argument.
When developers pay some organization to call for elder housing and push their interests, it’s an outrage.
When the Vanguard pays some organization to push its interests, that’s politics at its best.
David, you are free to argue as you please, but you would have more credibility if you were consistent.
“….CANNOT muster any citizens of Davis who are willing to VOLUNTEER, without pay, to work for the WHR project….”
I will hasten to add, to be completely accurate,… whose connections to Parlin’s campaign manager doesn’t raise disturbing questions.
Really: Not the same thing at all. In fact, that statement shows me that you really do not understand the issue even. In one case you have paid workers. In the other case you have a group of people recruited by the developers to make the appearance that there is a public outcry for senior housing in the community and therefore we need to address senior housing and down the road they will magically come forward with a project. Paid campaign workers happens all the time. Astroturfing is a very sinister thing. Very different from what is going on here.
BTW, just wanted to pass this on about how disgraceful an article the Dunning slam piece was. The student that knocked on Dunning’s door is taking the quarter off to work so that she can afford to pay for tuition. Her parents have lost their jobs and this is the only way she is going to be able to afford to go to college. For me, I just wish the No on P side would pick a different issue to attack, they have many that are much more important than attacking students trying to pay for their education.
Maybe I am naive or ignorant about this, but why is it such a bad thing that this particular political group or any political group provided services on a political campaign and earned money for their political cause doing it? Even more so, why is it such a bad thing if the College Dems actually support the issue and still earned money for their causes doing it?
To those who abhor the acts – please explain WHY it bothers you?
“What if these kids were paid by Whitcomb to hand out flyers in support of Covell Village IV? How would you feel then, DPD? “
I doubt these kids would. The Yes on Measure X campaign had paid canvassers too–dozens of them. Personally, I don’t have a problem with paid labor, I do it myself. These kids aren’t spending the money on pizzas as Dunning implies, they are all using it to pay for their tuition so that they can get a degree despite the rate hikes.
As a retired teacher of ENGLISH (and other subjects) I can’t believe the diatribe of useless commentary on this particular post. And while I am voting NO on P….I believe David has expressed himself quite well.
“As a retired teacher of ENGLISH (and other subjects) …”
I hope that you did a better job teaching how to use capital letters than you demonstrated above.
In fact your many punctuation errors make me doubt that you could possibly be a
retired English teacher.
Please don’t dump on the College Democrats. They are the hope of the future.
You’ve all completely missed the REAL issue here.
The Board of the College Democrats was convened just a few days after the 1:30am City Council vote by Parlin, Ritter et. al. and pitched for an endorsement. The Board did not hear any arguments from “No on P”. UC Davis was not in session, so there was no meeting of the general membership.
Then, days later, College Democrats are canvassing and manning the FM table for $15 per hour.
Pretty cheap endorsement! I wonder how much the Sierra Club charged?
Also, not all of the canvassers are College Dems. The two that came to my house this weekend were UC Davis students and one of them lived in Woodland.
paid Obama supporters voted for Obama…are the College Democrats endorsing P?
The Davis College Democrats have taken no position on Measure P as an organization. We have neither voted to endorse it nor to oppose it.
Many individual members of the organization are working on behalf of Yes on Measure P on their own accord. These members believe in the project and are putting in their own time to support it. Many members of the organization have put in labor for free in various locations throughout the state (Congressional campaigns in the 3rd, 4th, and 10th) and even out of state (Nevada, Georgia, and soon Maine). These members have seen the arguments regarding the Measure, and have decided to support it, and work on behalf of the affirmative position. The organization sees no fault in members doing so, nor does it fault them for being paid to do this work.
All reference to the Davis College Democrats in regards to Measure P are therefore nothing more than a quick method of referring to the college students working on behalf of Yes on Measure P. Also noteworthy, not all of the college students working for said campaign, are members of the Davis College Democrats.
Therefore, in the future, when discussing the Measure, it would be inappropriate, indeed entirely false, to say the Davis College Democrats did this or the Davis College Democrats did that.
Brandon J. Craig
President
Davis College Democrats
What is the difference between this and “astroturfing”? It seems that in either case, someone was paid to do some work. I don’t have a problem with people getting paid for work, but I’m struggling with David’s viewpoint that in one case he is against it, but it’s ok when it helps his cause.
And David, the last sentence of your commentary is hypocritical at best – on many occasions you have been very openly cynical and skeptical of the “opposition”, and that ranting in those cases is no different from Dunning’s rant that you are now criticizing.
Adam it appears you don’t know what Astroturfing is. Astroturfing is the creation of a false grass roots movement in hopes of creating an impression of mass support, this is merely the use of paid labor. Huge difference.
It is entirely hypocritical to say that the Davis College Democrats have not done their research on this when the people who are currently criticizing them have not done enough research to determine that the Davis College Democrats have not actually endorsed anything. Did the “No on B” campaign even contact Davis College Democrats to ask for their help?
To everyone who thinks it’s easy to do this sort of work – do you really think it’s not hard work to walk in 100 degree heat or in the rain for hours on end? Have you ever done this without being able to sit and take a break? Do you know how many miles these kids are walking? What about the psychological effect when the people answering the door treat these young people like dirt? Do you also think that’s easy?
In the article printed in the Davis Enterprise, the author said, “Davis dem dames dig dollars.” Does he realize how young the girls are that he is talking about in such a disparaging and disrespectful manner? What if we turn that around to talk about him by saying “Davis doddering dunderhead digs dollars”? I’m assuming that he has at some point in his life been paid to work.
Does anybody understand that it really doesn’t matter whether you are for or against Measure P – there is absolutely no reason to disparage a group of hardworking young people simply for trying to earn money for college. I have been fortunate enough to meet a few members of Davis College Democrats. They are intelligent, caring individuals, and they give me hope for the future of this country.
Again, please don’t dump on the College Dems. They are the hope of the future. This is a small and very local issue in the larger scope of things. We should respect all opinions.
“Teacher?” for starters, your ending a sentence with a preposition is a no-no….like i said..diatribe..and you are a leading ex.
[b]resident:[/b] [i]”your ending a sentence with a preposition is a no-no.”[/i]
It’s not always a no-no. Your scolding the “teacher” reminds me of a classic story: An editor of Sir Winston Churchill, one of the best non-fiction writers of the last century, had rearranged one of Churchill’s sentences to avoid ending it in a preposition, and the Prime Minister, very proud of his style, scribbled this note in reply: “This is the sort of bloody nonsense up with which I will not put.”
To: Get to the meat of this already!!
Re: “I wonder how much the Sierra Club charged?”
The Sierra Club received no money or services in return for its endorsement. The issue was first reviewed in two meetings of the Management Committee of the local Yolano Group (Yolo and Solano Counties) who then recommended endorsement to the Mother Lode Chapter (the broader Sacramento region) that reviewed the project and subsequently endorsed it. It was finally reviewed at the state level by the Sierra Club. At each level, the project was quantitatively evaluated against a long list of sustainable and environmentally sound policy criteria established by the national Sierra Club before a project could be endorsed. It was not a back-of-the-envelope or flip-of-the-coin type of process. The project was thoroughly vetted and discussed – both pros and cons – before the project was “endorsed” by the Sierra Club.
…i’d bother to explain to rich that he is totally confused with his comments…but this particular posting has enough diatribe to sink a ship…already!
“For all the people who disparage our youth, this is a group that we should admire regardless of the side of the aisle we are on.”
just like the Davis College Republicans.
” I have gotten to know a lot of the College Democrats and consider a number of them to be personal friends. They are dedicated, hard working, and very active in building their club and their cause. ”
just like the Davis College Republicans.
“The bottom line for me is that yes, they received money in exchange for their work, but they also showed a good deal of dedication and perseverance. They performed the work not just because they got paid but because they believed in the cause that they were performing.”
just like the Davis College Republicans.
The article insinuates the College Democrats are for Measure P, which we find out is not the case at all. In fact, SOME College Democrats HAVE CHOSEN TO pass out flyers for the Yes on P campaign IN EXHANGE FOR MONEY, but not necessarily bc they believe in the Measure P “cause”.
Huh?: “What if these kids were paid by Whitcomb to hand out flyers in support of Covell Village IV? How would you feel then, DPD? ”
DPD: “I doubt these kids would.”
In other words, you would not be comfortable with it?
Why is DCR relevant to the conversation? The article doesn’t mention them at all, and no one here was comparing the two organizations. DCR and DCD have actually worked well together recently, such as when they put on a troops drive in the Spring in conjunction with ROTC. To stand up for the DCD in this case in no way puts down the DCR; both organizations consist of dedicated and intelligent students who can study the issues and come to their own conclusions about them.
Then also, why is it that, just because DCD members are college students, they can’t believe in something and take money for it too? Would it be any different if they were just regular community members and not students? Why are people insinuating that they are too stupid to understand what’s going on and that they just follow the money? That is insulting to the very fiber of their beings as activists, and it personally slams a group of individuals this person has never had the pleasure to meet.
What do you think the College Dems must be feeling about this? All they want to do right now is go to class and pass their tests, and people who don’t even know them are bashing them online.
DCR and DCD have actually worked well together recently, such as when they put on a troops drive in the Spring in conjunction with ROTC. To stand up for the DCD in this case in no way puts down the DCR; both organizations consist of dedicated and intelligent students who can study the issues and come to their own conclusions about them.
right on. couldn’t have said it better myself. 🙂
I am against P for many reasons.
I think that potential buyers for the so called “affordable” $425k townhouses are people that already own property somewhere else and want to move to Davis. Equity covers the $42k down payment. Claiming that this project provides purchasing opportunities for “1st time buyers” is misleading. Notice that the cute “tree hugger” mailer has no potential sales information.
While the ambitious green claims sound great, keep in mind that WHR is an experiment done by a developer w/ no track record. WHR certainly will be more efficient. However the attractive 90% GHG reduction claim may simply be a sales pitch. Review and certification by a independent federal or state organization is an obvious step for WHR to take to back up the claims. This hasn’t happened. The developer’s claims also doesn’t include the WHR related auto emissions generated which is a ridiculous omission.
I totally support college students in a challenging world. Worth noting is the fact that WHR hasn’t attracted any working volunteers.