Parliamentary Maneuvers in 59A Fail to Block Endorsement

Post and video by the Hawthorne Hawkman, video from a previous candidate forum, not from the senate district convention.

The parliamentary order used to run meetings as small as neighborhood or church council and as large as political conventions has two guiding principles that participants too often forget.  First, it's supposed to make sense.  Second, people with a superior knowledge of parliamentary procedure are not supposed to use that knowledge to manipulate the outcome of a meeting.  Think of David Carradine's character in Kung Fu - a Shaolin monk who was a master of martial arts but never really used that to fight anyone.  The meeting or convention that uses parliamentary order might have plenty of drama, but the application of Robert's Rules of Order should have all the excitement of two people exchanging business cards in slow motion after they've taken an Ambien.

Clearly this is not what happened in the DFL convention for the house seat in 59A.  Joe Mullery did get the endorsement, but only after a series of convoluted parliamentary maneuvers.  I was in the midst of the 59B stalemate, and only heard snippets of how things were proceeding.  Challengers David Younk, David Boyd, and (surprisingly for a sitting elected official) Jon Olson were eliminated from contention after the first ballot, leaving Marcus Harcus to either claim or block a DFL endorsement of the incumbent.  In an ironic twist of fate, Mullery was at one time a single vote short of the nomination.  Had I already moved into 59A, I would have cast that clinching vote.  On two other occasions, there were enough spoiled ballots (the delegate did not sign the back of the ballot as required - even an x, or line, or anything that could remotely be construed as a signature would have validated those votes) that would have given Mullery the endorsement before the drama of the last vote.

I heard several versions of what transpired while at the convention itself.  Later on North Talk and on his own Facebook page, Harcus posted his version of the events.  After speaking with several credible sources, here is what I believe to be a fairly accurate recounting...

Candidates Debate in 58A

Post and video by the Hawthorne Hawkman, video done on behalf of the Senate district 58 DFL.

Before diving into the candidate debates, two things should be made clear.  First, the way the videos are labeled on the District 58 DFL website is not entirely accurate.  I did the recording at this forum and know that the questions preceded the candidate "introductions."  Our moderator slipped up and forgot to give the candidates time to introduce themselves.  Since she jumped into the questions immediately, she suggested that the candidates be given two minutes' worth of closing statements instead of a one-minute introduction and a one-minute closing remark.  The candidates agreed to the change in format.

Second, unlike in 58B where I am still neutral, I do have a candidate I support:  the incumbent Joe Mullery.  I support Mullery because our district is already losing its seniority of a senator and one representative.  That seniority means something in terms of committee memberships, and I don't want to see NoMi have three freshmen legislators who are at the bottom rung when it comes to influence.  Second, no legislator knows more about the housing crisis and mortgage technicalities than Joe.  I believe we need that expertise.  Joe's been around a long time and the time will come when we should hand the reins over to someone new.  I don't think we're there yet.

In describing the debate, I'll try to be fair, but readers should know my bias and be able to take that into account.

The candidates in attendance were David Boyd, Marcus Harcus, Joe Mullery, Jon Olson, and David Younk.  The moderator led off her questions with one about...