The chair of the San Francisco Democratic Party tried to sideline a resolution this weekend putting the state party on record urging California officials not to share license plate data with ICE.
Chair Nancy Tung was the only person at the state party’s executive committee meeting who asked that the resolution be taken off the consent calendar—a very unusual move.
In the end, she only got nine votes out of almost 300 members in attendance, and the resolution passed.
But David Campos, former SF supervisor and a party vice chair, told me her move sent a message: “The San Francisco Democratic Party is now the right wing of the state Democratic Party.”
The resolution came before the Executive Board of the state party Saturday. The Eboard is made up of ranking members of local county committees (along with a few top party officials).
The resolution was sponsored by Michelle Krug, who is the vice president of political action of San Diego Democrats for Equality. It wasn’t that controversial: It stated that automated license plate readers can collect a lot of data, and “present significant privacy and civil rights concerns, with data potentially accessible to federal immigration agencies, putting immigrant and marginalized communities at risk” and said that “The California Democratic Party opposes sharing automated license plate reader data with ICE and other federal agencies.”
These party resolutions, which don’t create enforceable legislation but do make clear where the party stands on key issues (and where the grassroots leaders think elected officials should stand) typically go through committees on the first day of the three-day meetings, and the ones that survive (many don’t) get to the full Eboard the final day.
They’ve already been vetted by party leaders, and anything that is out of the mainstream of party politics typically dies in committee. (I have seen this happy many times). Those that remain are on a consent calendar. It’s rare for anyone to pull one out and demand a roll call vote.
But that’s exactly what Tung did, saying, according to Campos, that sometimes cooperating with federal agencies around issues like human trafficking is helpful.
“But we have seen with this administration that sharing data with one federal agency means sharing it with ICE,” Campos told me.
Nobody would second her move except another San Francisco DCCC member, Josh Arce.
Under party rules, three people can speak against the resolution, and three for it. Nobody but Tung was willing to take her side.
So she lost, overwhelmingly. The resolution passed.
“But it’s sad to see where San Francisco is,” Campos said. After a billionaire-backed takeover of the local party, a city that used to be the heart of progressive politics in the state is now represented by a party chair who is willing to work with Donald Trump’s administration on law enforcement.
“It shows,” Campos said, “how out of step the San Francisco party has become.”
