RL Miller Profile picture
24 Oct, 33 tweets, 20 min read
On a special @ca_dem executive board meeting to ban fossil fuel and law enforcement money from the party. I haven't said much in public, til now. @NoFossilMoney thread!
@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney it all began when I served on a committee, henceforth known as committee 1.0, to address party finances. I lobbied hard to keep fossil fuel money out. And I won, and we wrote a report in Feb 2020.
@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney and that report was adopted by chair @rustyhicks at the March 2020 eboard meeting.

The minutes of that meeting, which iinclude that report, are not on the @ca_dem website. Coincidence?
@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks the process of working on that Committee 1.0 report was extremely secretive. The party restricted access to the report we wrote. We could not access the doc outside of 1 hour per month. We could not copy the doc at all.
@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks luckily, I had a sense that something was really wrong, so I screenshotted the critical graf providing that the party would stop taking fossil fuel money
@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks but then six months after signing off on that report banning fossil fuel money, @rustyhicks then took over $100k from Sempra Energy, an investor owned utilty committed to promoting natural gas and climate destruction.
@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks and the issue of fossil fuel money has been simmering within the party ever since.

Later in summer 2020, the party's finance committee also recommended against taking law enforcement money. And that also was basically ignored.
@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks we have tried to work thru party channels, which is why I've stayed fairly quiet on twitter. And we have been stonewalled at every turn.
@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks in August 2021 at the eboard, we tried to bring forth two motions to bar the party from fossil fuel money and law enforcement money, and chair Hicks refused to hear the motions.
@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks in frustration at the stonewalling, we -- 50 executive board members -- petitioned for a special meeting, the meeting happening right now.
And then the real obstacle course began.
@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks the party demanded we "verify" our signatures by faxing (!!!) wet signatures (!!!). They demanded we pre-register, and pre-register again, and held a special credentials committee meeting to verify, again, that we were entitled to vote.
@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks the party demanded that we provide the names and addresses of each speaker.
@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks now, the party is offering to convene a Commitee 2.0 to redo the work of Committee 1.0. And I have some things to say about why that's a bad idea.
@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks right now the party secretary is trying to sell Dem exec board members on the need for more delay and more committee processes, rather than simply making the decison now.
@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks this week, in response to our demand for a special meeting, the party announced the members of Committee 2.0. Several of the most conservative, status quo defending members of the party. No climate activists at all.
@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks and the party treasurer is paying lip service to the general idea of a habitable planet, and standing in solidarity with young Sunrise activists. She will vote against our motion to cease taking fossil fuel money now.
@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks so shortly the party will be voting, and this is pretty simple. Do we immediately cease taking fossil fuel money or do we study the matter again?
@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks because committee 2.0, made up of mostly conservative status quo defenders, is either going to reaffirm the work of committee 1.0 (2019-20) or it's going to water down the work of committee 1.0, whose key graf I had to screenshot because it was never made public
@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks right now party vice chair @BettyYeeforCA is speaking in favor of delay and study.
@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks @BettyYeeforCA my bad. she is making a motion to approve the delay committee tactici, ahead of the motions we have been working on.

Activiists are being steamrolled by the party.
@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks @BettyYeeforCA we activists forced the special meeting to be heard. We brought motions. Our motions have not been heard. Instead @BettyYeeforCA is moving a substitute motion to rubber stamp a delay committee.
@CA_Dem @NoFossilMoney @rustyhicks @BettyYeeforCA I'm honestly in shock. We forced a special meeting to hold a meeting to get the party to stop taking fossil fuel money and law enforcement money. party put every obstacle in our path. Now that we finally get the meeting we are not being heard!!!
All i can say is: the world is watching @Ca_dem leaders argue in favor of delay as Cal is being hammered by a bomb cyclone. Delay is denial and @rustyhicks is a climate denier.
Multiple people are trying to be heard to table this steamroller motion but @rustyhicks will not recognize them.

Same tactic as in August 2021 that led to this meeting.
I count six people who wanted to be heard to amend the steamroller/ delay motion, table, reconsider, etc, raise points of order. None of them were recognized before the vote.
Motion passes 78 percent to 22 percent
We now are taking up the motion to immediately ban fossil fuel money. This is a Potemkin vote. The 78-22 vote to delay and study the matter further was the key vote.
I spoke in favor of the second motion to immediately stop taking fossil fuel money. But as noted above, any vote would be a Potemkin vote, hollow and meaningless
And here it comes, a motion to defer and delay "immediately stop taking fossil fuel money" to the Delay Committee 2.0. Because the planet is not at all on fire.
Vote is 199 to 117 to defer to Delay Committee 2.0 an immediate ban on fossil fuel money. IOW, over 60 percent of voting @CA_Dem folk favor delay, study, process rather than action on @NoFossilMoney.
Now the party is doing a re run of the fossil fuel money issue, on law enforcement money. Motion to defer and delay and study after vows to stand for Black Lives Matter. Black speaker calls party out for performative allyship.
Vote to delay an immediate ban on law enforcement money, and instead send to Delay Committee 2.0, passes 188 to 121.
Party Finance Committee made this recommendation over a year ago but chair @rustyhicks ignored it.
Vote to adjourn the meeting passes, 233 to 54. End of live rage tweeting thread.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with RL Miller

RL Miller Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @RL_Miller

25 Oct
on the #Tesla5000 road trip last week I had plenty of time to think about places where Tesla needs to be. And the rental car market is one of them. Short thread.
Places where Tesla is:
1. Everywhere in California cities.
2. Sheetz, which is a PA-based convenience store chain. (Llike 7-11 or AM/PM)
3. Kum & Go, Midwest-based convenience store chain. Also 7-11/ AM/PM type) No, coastal elites, you don't get to make jokes about its name.
and these are all good things. Tesla chargers are not at EVERY Sheetz or Kum & Go, but enough to provide good, highway-offramp-convenient, charging every 100 miles or so.
Read 18 tweets
25 Oct
I've had a bit of time to process WTF the Cal Dem Party did this weekend. Thread, with a link to my original rough live tweeting
1. What happened: The progressives wanted a simple up-or-down vote on whether the party should continue to take fossil fuel and law enforcement money. We forced a meeting to get that vote. We did not get that vote.
1a. Instead the party chair in a carefully orchestrated power play first had the party vote on a committee to study the matter. The vote was NOT needed at all because the committee, members, and purpose had already been announced and did not need party approval. But...
Read 20 tweets
13 Sep
short thread on Cal recall for national folk. Things we know but you don't. #StopTheRepublicanRecall

1. The NO side will win.
2. Earlier I'd predicted that NO (pro-Newsom) will win by at least 55 percent. Polls/ tracking show that it might be 58 to 60 percent.

Key context: Newsom beat the trashbear guy 62-38 in 2018.
3. Anything less than 62 percent, and the national media (lookin' at you @politico) will spin it as BAD NEWS for Democrats. In disarray. All that.

Even if NO breaks 62 percent, somehow it's bad news for Dems. Because Politico.
Read 8 tweets
21 Jul
Very short thread.

@ClimateHawkVote is running a survey asking our folk, among other things, their climate bill wish list. Listed 12 things including carbon price/ tax/ fee and dividend.

Survey bit.ly/3kJKF7M
@ClimateHawkVote and I peeked at early results (survey is still active). And support for a #carbontax has, to be blunt, fallen off a cliff.

Or, nosedived like a peregrine falcon.
@ClimateHawkVote A #carbontax is second to last in things climate hawks want to see in a federal climate bill.

Among 11 policies + other, it ranked 10th.
Read 5 tweets
21 Jul
this AM I went on a ranty thread on The Atlantic's latest bit of California-bashing, called "The California Dream is Dying," based on 1960s-70s tropes and whines. And I learned way too much about compounding pharmacies!
A compounding pharmacy is someone who makes their own Rx from raw ingredients. Turns out it's useful for things Big Pharma won't touch.
and in my thread I used the example of a grower of artisanal opium poppies making making morphine... turns out that DEA is OF COURSE going to regulate/ ban that.
Read 7 tweets
21 Jul
Let's analyze the latest entry in the Eastern Publications Trash California sweepstakes, shall we? This one, in a place called "The Atlantic," called "The California Dream is Dying." bit.ly/3wTaHYv
Apparently there is no magazine called "The Pacific," but readers of "The Atlantic" CRAVE California-bashing just like NYT readers do. In fact this piece is currently the most-read piece on "The Atlantic."
And to reach this conclusion that "The California Dream is dying," the writer cites:
1. LA NIMBY homeowners
2. Central Valley Repubs
3. The owner of something called a compounding pharmacy
Read 16 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!