A number of party leaders are frustrated that Hogg, who has a leadership position in the party, is pushing primaries against some incumbents in deep-blue seats.
Democratic party leaders Thursday morning admonished officers to not take sides in primaries, addressing a situation involving activist and Democratic National Committee vice chair David Hogg.
“Let me be unequivocal. No DNC officer should ever attempt to influence the outcome of a primary election, whether on behalf of an incumbent or a challenger,” DNC Chair Ken Martin said in a press call. “Voters should decide who our primary nominees are, not DNC leadership. Our role is to serve as stewards of a fair, open and trusted process, not to tilt the scales.”’
As of now, however, the DNC does not have the power to remove Hogg if he refuses to stand down on funding primary challenges through a separate PAC — unless the body changes its rules, a senior DNC official told NBC News.
“Under the present bylaws, there is no action that can be taken against David Hogg without changing to the bylaws to extend that policy of neutrality to all primaries," DNC Finance Chair Chris Korge told NBC News. "There is no codified, legal way to remove an officer for doing what David Hogg has done because it only extends to the presidential race. "
Korge said that, as of now, the situation is to be addressed at a future meeting, likely in August.
Korge said he believed it was imperative for the body to formally change its bylaws because the party division the Hogg situation has caused harkens to an old ghost Democrats don’t want to revisit.
“It smells like 2016, when progressives said the DNC had it in the bag for Hillary Clinton," Korge said, referencing angst in the party that the DNC had its thumb on the scale to block Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., from the presidential nomination. “No party official, no officer of the DNC, should do anything that would result in the division that was created by the perception that existed back in 2016.”
On Thursday, Martin went on to say he had spoken to Hogg about what he perceived as a conflict but he did not expound on whether he gave him an ultimatum.
“I understand what he’s trying to do,” Martin continued in the press call. “As I’ve said to him, ‘If you want to challenge incumbents, you’re more than free to do that. But just not as an officer of the DNC, because our job is to be a neutral arbiter. We can’t be both the referee and also the player at the same time. You have to make a decision.’”
In pushing back on Thursday, Hogg cited Trump’s power clashes with institutions in saying the party needed to take more aggressive actions. He added that he had not violated any DNC bylaws.
“They’re trying to change the rules because I’m not currently breaking them. As we’re seeing law firms, tech companies, and so many others bowing to Trump, we all must use whatever position of power we have to fight back. And that’s exactly what I’m doing,” Hogg said in a statement.
Note that the text OP posted above is NOT the whole article!!
IDK why that isn’t made clear?
David Hogg is right IMO, the party needs a reset, and the platform needs a reset. For one: Calling themselves the Democratic party, they really should work more to improve democracy in USA! As it is they are not really democrats any more than people calling themselves pro life when in fact they aren’t at all pro life. What they are is against abortion rights.
Likewise the Democrats have helped maintain the status quo, in a dysfunctional flawed democratic system.
its a community rule not to post the whole article, so I posted some of it
i agree with hogg that the party needs a reset, but the vice chair of the party should not be the one making that comment because it gives all appearances that the party will be picking and choosing the primary candidates and throwing their weight behind their preferred candidate. that’s going to lead to party fractures and a lot of hard feelings. you want to ensure more republicans winning easier than they should on the local level? have the party pick the candidate instead of the people in the district.
that’s why i am very glad the chair has pretty much laid down the law. the party leadership (save one) is committed to electing democrats wherever they are whoever they are. one person in leadership is committed to electing specific democrats to office.
which if you think about it is a colossal failure. he’s down in florida. he’s had ample opportunity to elect his chosen democrats in florida with his pac. how successful were his candidates? and you’ve got people who see that (lack of) success he had in florida and say, “yeah, let’s take that plan and apply it nationwide, even if the better democrat for an area isn’t someone that hogg prefers.”
It’s neat how this hasn’t been a concern until just now.
Maybe they shouldn’t commit to democrats that continuously vote with the Republicans?
I don’t see why there shouldn’t be standards.