So I want to talk about a @nycDSA convention proposal we talked about at branch last night to only have dues paying members who have been in the organization for 3 months in order to speak or vote on endorsements of candidates running for elected office.

As @socialistfai laid out well last night, this is about giving members an opportunity to learn about the organization, our priorities, and what essentially it means for us to endorse a candidate before participating in the process. It’s not like a ballot vote, it’s more complex.

And of course we want to prevent vote packing. Critics say this is paranoid but I know at the Queens DA endorsement meeting candidates (though ironically not Tiffany if I recall correctly) rolled up with a crew, I wouldn’t put it past them to put down money to win.

Because to be clear that’s the standard right now. Anyone can show up to a DSA meeting, half way through the meeting sign up to be a member online, and get to speak and vote. That’s just begging for people to disrupt things even beyond vote packing/whipping.

Let’s address some of the criticisms. No. 1: this will turn away new members. I doubt it. 3 months is short and if someone feels entitled to vote based on essentially giving us money, they may not be ready for us anyways. Democracy is about living with decisions you don’t make.

A socialist organization is not the government. We don’t rule by the consent of the people etc. Our democracy is important but it is and should be distinct from the universal voting standards we would like to see in elections for public office.

No. 2: this will disproportionately disenfranchise people of color. I highly doubt it. The majority of DSA joins in periodic “waves,” usually following successful elections like AOC or recent sweep. This proposal (as amended to 3 months) disenfranchises very few members.

No. 3: not letting people speak is insane. Not so much a criticism as a personal attack lol but no it isn’t. If anything I’m more worried about the possibility for disruption of letting less-than-3 months members speak than I am about voting. Opportunists could take time.

No. 4: this is unfair to members behind on their dues. Actually there is a provision that lets any member behind on dues come current at the time of the meeting in order to speak and vote. We want people invested in the organization making its important decisions.

(And just a reminder that DSA has a range of dues options, including choose your own) https://act.dsausa.org/donate/membership_redesign/

So in sum this is a proposal as amended that is very narrowly targeted to both provide a probationary period to members to get situated in the organization before directing it and to prevent vote packing and other disruption and opportunism.

Here’s the text, Constitutional Amendment No. 5, shout out to @Sulliedsubjects for submitting this important process and protection for our organization https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KO_CjRgYLq8vSdmGrM2ErV5UUKMwm9aeweccrVUi83U/edit