A Book for Democrats to Read: Drew Westen's "The Political Brain"

After having read several positive reviews and hearing about it either on NPR or a similar news program, Melanie and I picked up a copy of Drew Westen's "The Political Brain." The subtitle is "The Role of Emotions in Deciding The Fate of the Nation." It was recently published by Public Affairs Books.

Though I am only about 75 pages into it, I already recommend it highly to all Democrats ... most particularly to our candidates and their campaign teams who handle media/message/platform development. What is most educational so far in this book is the message that Democrats often lose elections because we focus on dry facts/details/reason to the detriment of how voters are driven by emotions and passions. Mr. Westen shows how we - using hypothetical examples from real races for President - can be "passionate" and emotive in our appeals to voters while still remaining committed to the facts and what is right, proper, moral and honorable.

Once both Melanie and I have finished the book and compared notes then I'll update this post.

Meanwhile, check it out at your library, pick one up at your bookstore, or go online and order it. You won't regret it.

Tackling the Myths Against NC's Electoral College reforms

Here are some points I shared with legislators this week as they considered whether to pass SB 353, the Presidential electors bill.

* * * * *

Good morning!

By now you have already received a barrage of emails and calls against this bill.

However, this is not one of them.

As a former lawmaker who introduced similar legislation in the past, and as a director of the NC Center for Voter Education, and, more importantly, as a voter who wants my vote and your vote for President to count, please VOTE YES on SB 353 today. In brief, here is why:

You have heard various points for and against the bill.

Many opponents of SB 353 want you to believe several outright misrepresentations (at best).

Myth/Misrepresentation #1: NC has always awarded its electors using a "winner take all" method.

Answer: FALSE. NC, like many states, did not use a "winner take all" method until well into the 19th century. My thorough, accurate research - including several published articles of mine over the years - detail this.

Myth/Misrepresentation #2: Adopting any presidential elector change like in SB 353 violates the US Constitution and the intent of the Founding Fathers.

Answer: FALSE. Anyone who says the above to you is either ignorant of the Constitution (and the the process that led to its creation) or purposely misleading you. A clear, direct reading of the relevant provisions of the Constitution says that how a State chooses its presidential electors is LEFT UP TO THE STATES. In fact, presidential electors - starting with the election of George Washington - were NOT awarded on a winner-take-all basis. It was a concept that did not catch on until the 1840s and then gradually began to emerge for decades. ... In fact, by supporting SB 353 you would be what is called a "strict constructionist" of the Constitution, a conservative position that even the John Roberts/Antonin Scalia U.S. Supreme Court could not oppose!

Myth/Misrepresentation #3: SB 353 is less democratic and harms the weight of each voter's ballot for President.

Answer: FALSE. Most people do not realize that the current system of "winner take all" is not about who gets a majority of votes in NC ... it actually is who gets a "plurality" - that is, the most votes, even if many more people actually oppose the vote-leader. In other words, a presidential candidate in NC, under the current system, could get ALL of the the State's electors even if that candidate received, for example, only 33% of the vote! This is not merely a hypothetical. As recently as 1992 in NC, the current system awarded ALL of its NC electors to incumbent President George H.W. Bush (father of the current President) even though he ONLY received 43% of the votes in NC. Clinton received 42% and Perot received the balance. Compare with the elections here in NC in 1948, 1968, and 1980. ... Equally compelling is this question: Is it fair if 49.9999% of the States' voters have no electors to represent their preference for President? ... If anything, adopting SB 353 will ensure that votes are not wasted and that the awarding of our State's electors better reflects the will of our State's voters by basing it mostly upon Congressional districts. SB 353 is a bold underscoring of what our "democratic republic", or representative, form of government is all about.

Myth/Misrepresentation #4: NC has not considered this bill in recent years.

Answer: FALSE. In the late 1980s/early 1990s, a similar bill passed the NC House of Representatives. In 2001, the bill I filed on the subject passed the House Election Laws Committee. That same year, the Senate passed its version (sponsored by former Senator Howard Lee) out of the Senate.

Myth/Misrepresentation #5: SB 353 is a bill only sought by Democrats.

Answer: FALSE. As recently as 2001 forward, countless Republicans have filed and pushed similar bills in States all around the country, as well as Democrats. By my count, at least 20 States have been considering this positive election law reform in recent years.

Myth/Misrepresentation #6: SB 353 will dilute our weaken our State's role in the presidential election contest.

Answer: FALSE: To the contrary, given that we are one of the 10 largest states, presidential candidates from the major parties will flock here more than ever to visit voters and not just come by to rake up campaign cash. If Republican and Democratic presidential candidates know that several Congressional districts - and their presidential electors - are in play in NC, then they will spend more time here. Another plus: NC will have an economic benefit, probably in the many millions of dollars, by the additional spending of campaigns and supporters of candidates here. It is high time that more of our presidential candidates pay attention to NC. If we can't move up our presidential primary, then SB 353 is a welcome alternative. And it is good for business.

* * * * *

Though there are many other misrepresentations being advocated by opponents, please consider the above and VOTE YES for SB 353.

It will be the best way to give voters more say in who NC actually supports for President.

Thank you for your consideration.

Wayne Goodwin
Former member, NC House of Representatives (1997-2004)

Public Financing of Campaigns Preserves Campaigns By, Of, For the People

Public Financing of Campaigns Preserves Power for the People
By Wayne Goodwin
July 2, 2007

So why do we elect so many statewide officials?

Back in the 1700s, fear of King-picked Royal Governors and their great powers helped sow strong sentiments against strong State executives. Those seeds sprouted into many revisions of our State constitution, guaranteeing a weak governor and a State government with decentralized executive authority.

As our state grew, responsibility for important policy areas such as agriculture, education, labor policy, and the regulation of insurance was divided among independently-elected constitutional offices, together called the Council of State.

Because of this division, each Council of State officer is continuously and increasingly bombarded by special interests who want to influence these policy areas. The bombardment reaches fever pitch leading up to elections, when special interests ratchet up their pitch with campaign contributions or promises of contributions to candidates they approach.

Witness recent scandals involving disgraced former Agriculture Commissioner Meg Scott Phipps, House Speaker Jim Black, and others during the last few years. What have these scandals done to public trust in government? It is vastly important for such officials to remain free from actual or perceived undue influence. That is why campaign reforms for these offices, and others, is so badly needed.

This is not merely academic for me: It is real. As an eight-year State Representative and a candidate for Labor Commissioner in 2004, I witnessed first-hand what our candidates for Statewide office endure. While it used to be that a candidate would visit all the county seats and the respective Sheriff in each courthouse, and call on a few people in each county while enjoying an RC Cola at a country store or humpteen BBQs, today campaigning is about the money chase and spending every waking hour raising campaign contributions. Why? Because campaigns today cost more and involve expensive TV ads, countless polls, and consultants in a world where fewer and fewer folks pay attention to elections. In my own 2004 race, like other candidates, I had to lock myself in a cubicle – a campaign War Room – and spend up to 12 hours daily, 6 days weekly, on the phone between 6 and 12 months. Frankly, asking people you know – and those you don't know - to each donate up to thousands of dollars is awkward … but a necessary component of the current system. Asking someone to donate to a charitable cause or a church or a scholarship program is one thing, but making 200 calls daily for your personal campaign's benefit decimates what a candidate should be doing: Spending time with voters.

To accumulate the amount of cash most campaigns are told they need these days, they choose to focus more often on donors of larger sums.

It should also be no surprise that many persons who donate to Council of State offices are often persons directly or indirectly regulated by those very offices, a situation which is potentially fraught with all sorts of problems. Big donors sometimes use their influence to seek tax breaks, weak regulations, or favors that cost the taxpayers millions of dollars.

In 2007 legislators have filed a bill that's a first step toward solving this problem. House Bill 1517 would create a voluntary public financing option for certain Council of State candidates. Lawmakers, current and former Council of State leaders, and thousands of North Carolinians believe it is a good idea because it gives candidates a chance to forego the dreadful money chase in exchange for limited public money to run their campaigns. In exchange for participating, candidates waive their right to seek contributions from big donors and from political action committees (PACs). If the General Assembly passes this pilot program, then in 2008 we will take a gigantic step towards cleaning up the campaign process. We will increase the number of qualified candidates willing to run and interaction between them and the voters.

North Carolina has a history that recognizes the value of a government based on power sharing and not powerful State executives. Public financing of campaigns is a voluntary method that helps ensure this power-sharing continues. Let's keep North Carolina elections voter-owned. We all win when the public knows our politicians are not beholden to powerful special interests, but only beholden to us.

# # #

Wayne Goodwin is a Director and Secretary of the N.C. Center for Voter Education. A native of Hamlet, he represented Richmond, Scotland, Stanly, and Montgomery Counties in the N.C. House of Representatives for eight years. He was co-sponsor of the original judicial public financing legislation. Today he is the Assistant Commissioner of Insurance. His spouse, State Representative Melanie Wade Goodwin, chairs the House Election Laws and Campaign Finance Reform Committee.

NC Democrats & Wayne Goodwin to Hold Regional Town Meetings

July 6, 2007

Dear North Carolina Democrat:

Now that the 2007 congressional district conventions have been held and resolutions passed by those districts have been referred to me and the NCDP Platform and Resolutions Committee, we are now at the time when two vital things occur:

(1) The Platform and Resolutions Committee schedules its work session in advance of the August 25th State Executive Committee meeting in Greensboro; and,

(2) As chairman of the Platform and Resolutions Committee, I announce the schedule of Regional Town Hall Meetings. These regional meetings are opportunities for Democrats to gather together to discuss, comment on, and recommend resolutions that were either passed by one or more district conventions, submitted by an NCDP auxiliary group (whether official or unofficial), submitted by the public at large, submitted by the Resolutions Committee, or submitted by the NCDP chairman.

Do note two additional items. First, because there is no State Convention in odd-numbered years and we adopted a thorough Platform last July, this year we will only consider resolutions. No amendments to the Platform will be considered until 2008 in advance of the State Convention. (This is not to be confused with any proposed amendments to the Plan of Organization, which arise through a separate process and committee.) Second, because we only address resolutions this year, then we are able to start a little later with our regional town meetings than in previous years.

These meetings have been quite successful and productive in the recent past. In 2005 and 2006 more than 300 persons each year participated in the meetings all across the State. We also received hundreds of resolutions and proposed Platform amendments, all indicative of a vibrant Party membership resolute in taking a stand and in taking action on matters of interest to them. I have been very pleased with how inclusive and more efficient we have been with the process during these two years. It has also been pleasing to note that our Democratic legislators, State officials, and Congressional leaders have received the adopted resolutions and Platform as well. This is a vast improvement over years past. We have more improvements to make but the key to success lies with you.

Accordingly, the work session of the full Platform and Resolutions Committee is hereby set for 6 p.m., Thurs., August 9 at NC Democratic Party HQ in Raleigh. Attendance is open to the public, as always. We will allow for participation by conference call and email as needed.

As for the schedule of the Regional Town Hall Meetings themselves, the dates and locations are:

July 16
Raleigh
Wake Co. Democratic Party
NC Dem. HQ, 220 Hillsborough St
6:30 pm
Contact: Jan, 919-828-5656 admin@wakedems.org

July 25
Winston-Salem
Forsyth Co. Democratic Party
Southside Library, 3185 Buchanan Street
6:30 pm
Contact: Fred, 336-391-2381 fterry@triad.rr.com

July 26
Asheville
Buncombe Co. Dem. Party
Buncombe Co. Dem. HQ, 951 Fairview Road
6 pm
Contact: Kathy, 828-645-0906, hq@buncombedems.org
tandem9@charter.net

July 30
Charlotte
Mecklenburg Co. Dem. Party
TBD (one of the libraries), Location to be determined by July 12
6:30 pm
Contact: David, 704-579-2006 erdman@charlotte-nc-law.com

July 31
Fayetteville
Cumberland Co. Dem. Party
Cumberland Co. HQ Library,
Pate Room, 300 Maiden Lane
6 pm
Contact: Roberta, 910-484-7936 RWADDLE@nc.rr.com

Aug 1
New Bern
Craven Co. Dem. Party
Golden Corral Buffet & Grill Restaurant
400 Hotel Dr (near Hwy 70 and U.S. 17)
6 pm
Contact: Rachel, rparnell43@suddenlink.net

Aug 2
Greenville
Pitt Co. Dem. Party
Sheppard Memorial Library, Conf. Rm B
530 Evans Street
6:30 pm
Contact: Johnny, 252-321-7743 rousejohnny@hotmail.com

Aug 7
Windsor
Bertie Co. Dem. Party
Bertie Co. Courthouse
Courthouse Square, downtown Windsor
6:30 pm
Contact: Penny, 252-794-2968 dgtptt@earthlink.com

Aug 8
Durham
Durham Co. Dem. Party
Durham Co. Public Library, SW branch
near Orange Co. line; 3605 Shannon Rd.,
http://www.durhamcountylibrary.org/locations/s.php
7 pm
Contact: Kevin, 919-416-0445 kmf@nc.rr.com

Aug 9
Raleigh
NCDP PLAT. & RESOLUTIONS COMM.
NCDP HQ, 220 Hillsborough St.
6:30 pm
Contact: Wayne, 910-997-1301 gwaynegoodwin@gmail.com

Note: At the time of this printing we were still trying to select the best date for the Wilmington regional town meeting. If there is sufficient interest, we may schedule one in Lexington. Furthermore, you will note that one site is still to be determined (TBD), as we await further input from the county or regional party leaders. Regardless, we are “locked in” on the dates. Watch your email and the NCDP website for updates. Feel free to contact me as well as indicated below.

Please pass the word to members of your respective county Party membership, especially precinct chairs and officers. We would like to equal or exceed attendance this year as we prepare for the August 25th State Executive Committee meeting where we will act on the work done by the Platform and Resolutions Committee. If you have any questions or concerns or resolution suggestions, then please feel free to email me at gwaynegoodwin@gmail.com or call me at (910) 997-1301, or you may fax me via the NCDP at (919) 821-4778 (remember to put my name on the fax). For your convenience I have also enclosed a copy of the material on how to construct a resolution, as found in the NCDP County Chairs Handbook.

In closing, let us recall that resolutions are how we as Democrats collectively express ourselves on issues of the day – whether they concern our Nation, our State, or our own local community. They are ways to educate and inspire; more importantly, resolutions are calls to action.

Thank you for your dedicated service to the North Carolina Democratic Party, and answering this call to action!

With warmest personal regards, I am

Very truly yours,

WAYNE GOODWIN
Chairman, Platform and Resolutions Committee

Enclosure

Senate Committee Slated to Strip Insurance Commissioner of Rate-Setting Authority on May 22

Below is a post of mine on BlueNC.com that I thought the 8th District would want to read about as well.

* * * *

URGENT ACTION NEEDED:

You may recall a previous entry of mine here on BlueNC regarding SB 901 filed earlier this legislative session. Well, immediate action is needed because the Senate Commerce Committee is scheduled to take up the bill this coming Tuesday, May 22nd at 11 a.m. in Raleigh. With the "crossover" deadline looming only 2 days later, any thing could happen ... and that is very, very dangerous for consumers and payers of insurance premiums here in North Carolina.

Insurance Commissioner Jim Long has asked me to challenge EVERY BlueNC reader and believer to do 2 things: (1) read the following summary of what the bill does; and (2) email, fax, and/or call every member of the Senate Commerce Committee before 9 a.m. on Tues., May 22nd.

First, here is the summary:

If SB 901 passes, then insurance companies will be able to file and use higher insurance rates automatically. If SB 901 had been in place in 2006, then insurance companies would have been able to charge homeowners in eastern and coastal NC up to a 125% increase in homeowners insurance premiums.

If SB 901 passes, then the "burden of proof" - a powerful legal concept - will be moved from the insurance companies seeking rate increases to the Insurance Commissioner instead. What that means is that the Insurance Commissioner will have to prove that insurance rate hikes are unreasonable and excessive, etc., instead of insurance companies having the burden to prove why they should charge higher rates.

If SB 901 passes, then it will remove the limitations for automobile and workers' comp rate filings: Those insurance companies will be able to make multiple rate filings and rate hikes in one calendar year.

If SB 901 passes, then the filed rates will go into effect immediately and would remain effective unless the Commissioner disputes the filing and a special Superior Court judge agrees with the Commissioner.

If SB 901 passes, then the rate-setting authority will be shifted to a Special Superior Court Judge in Wake County and away from an Insurance Commissioner elected Statewide.

If SB 901 passes, then a judge unfamiliar with the technical, complexities of insurance rate-setting - and without sufficient staff - will hear insurance rate-setting cases instead of the Commissioner of Insurance and his bevy of independent specialists working in the NC Department of Insurance.

If SB 901 passes, then you are guaranteed that your automobile insurance rates will go up. Why? NC already enjoys being the 5th lowest in auto insurance premiums in the country. With SB 901 there is no where to go but higher premiums.

If SB 901 passes, then insurance companies will even benefit from a new enormous windfall in the millions of dollars: Instead of having to refund excessive premiums to North Carolinians from the date the rates were raised by the companies, the insurance companies will only have to refund the amount of monies paid in unfairly since the decision by the Court. That is a huge change that will cost citizens and small businesses millions and millions of dollars.

If SB 901 passes, the Department of Insurance anticipates that workers' compensation premiums for NC small businesses will rise just as quickly as auto insurance.

If SB 901 passes, then it will allow insurance companies to charge rates that are higher than the maximum approved rates.

If SB 901 passes, then we know for certain that homeowners insurance premiums will rise up to 125% because of what insurance companies sought on the coast and in eastern NC in 2006, and based upon the activities of many of those companies in neighboring southern States.

Insurance Commissioner Jim Long believes that our current system works well for consumers and insurance companies. SB 901 benefits ONLY insurance companies.

He asks that you contact members of the Senate Commerce Committee BEFORE 9 a.m. on Tues., May 22nd.

Those Senators are: Soles, chairman; Rand, vice chairman; Hoyle, vice chairman; Apodaca, Doug Berger, Phil Berger, Boseman, Dalton, Dorsett, Foriest, Forrester, Garrou, Goodall, Goss, Graham, Hagan, Hunt, Jacumin, Kerr, Malone, McKissick, Nesbitt, Pittenger, Purcell, Shaw, Stevens.

Tell them you STRONGLY OPPOSE SB 901 and tell them why.

Democrats control the State Senate and the State House and there is no reason for Democrats to be voting in favor of this anti-consumer bill on Tuesday morning, May 22. If they do, and it passes out of committee and out of the Senate, then it will be the proverbial "camel's nose under the tent" ... virtually guaranteeing its passage in some form and prompting similar anti-consumer legislation down the road.

Do consumers and small businesses want or need to change the current system? No, of course not!

Please keep us posted on what you hear in response from legislators. My work email address is wgoodwin@ncdoi.net and my personal email address is wayne@waynegoodwin.org.

Thanks, again, to BlueNC for all it (and its many members and fans) do!

Wayne Goodwin
Assistant Commissioner of Insurance
NC Dept of Insurance
State of North Carolina

Eighth District Dems Preparing for 2007 Convention

The district officers have been working feverishly to prepare for the 400+ delegates elected to this year's 8th District Democratic Convention.

Each delegate from across the district's 10 counties will have received several reminders before the May 19th gathering in Wadesboro at the campus of South Piedmont Community College.

And for the first time in many years, each delegate will have a information-packed program book for use during and after the convention. My personal thanks go out to June Mabry of Stanly County for having borne the greatest burdens in preparing it and having it printed in time for the event. The District Committee must also express its thanks to all the Democrats who purchased ads, thus making the program book possible.

We are very pleased as well that our Anson County friends agreed to host the overall event. Providing lunch for each attendee will be State Senator Bill Purcell and Rep. Pryor Gibson.

In addition to hearing remarks from those excellent legislators, we will also hear from State Rep. Tricia Ann Cotham (youngest and newest lawmaker in Raleigh), NC Court of Appeals Judge Linda Stephens, and Larry Kissell. Other guests will be recognized on Saturday. They all will help us celebrate our convention theme, "The Year of the Woman."

For now, do plan to attend ... Registration starts at 9 a.m. and the convention gavel comes down at 10 a.m. Come join us as we start the process of making North Carolina a Blue State in 2008!

Keep Insurance Rates Low - Oppose SB 901 and HB 1430

If when you read this the 2007 session of the North Carolina General Assembly has not adjourned, then please contact your legislators and share your position relative to the resolution below:

A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF INSURANCE COMMISSIONER JIM LONG
AND IN OPPOSITION TO SENATE BILL 901 AND HOUSE BILL 1430

WHEREAS, the Insurance Commissioner is a constitutionally-elected officer of the State and one of the members of the Council of State;

WHEREAS, the duties of the Insurance Commissioner include, among other things, (1) the setting of maximum rates for various types of insurance sold to citizens and businesses in North Carolina, (2) prevention of unlawfully discriminatory or unreasonable or unjustifiable insurance premiums, and (3) ensuring that the market for insurance in the State remains viable so citizens and businesses may purchase insurance at a reasonable cost while allowing a fair profit for insurance companies;

WHEREAS, Insurance Commissioner Jim Long has saved much more than $4 BILLION for the consumers of this State during his time in office by preventing unjustified insurance premium increases from going into effect;

WHEREAS, North Carolina has the 5th lowest automobile liability insurance premiums in the United States of America, bested only by several small states, and the 20th lowest homeowners' insurance premiums in the nation;

WHEREAS, Insurance Commissioner Jim Long declares that the system is not broken and, even if it needs correction, certainly does not justify giving insurance companies everything they demand, something which Senate Bill 901 and House Bill 1430 would do;

WHEREAS, legislation has been filed this year in the North Carolina General Assembly that would dramatically change the role of the Insurance Commissioner and provide insurance companies with an automatic right to increase their rates with a lessened ability of the Insurance Commissioner to protect the public;

WHEREAS, if insurance companies had had the benefit of their proposed changes to the law in 2006 then North Carolina's coastal homeowners would have suffered a 125% increase in their homeowners' insurance premiums and other parts of the State would have experienced increases of more than 50% in one year alone.

WHEREAS, the proposed legislation also reduces the amount of the refunds to which consumers are entitled if insurance companies are found to have charged unlawful, excessive or unjustifiable premium rates.

BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that this county convention hereby calls for the defeat of Senate Bill 901 and House Bill 1430 in that these bills, if passed in their current form, would eliminate North Carolina's Commissioner of Insurance from the rate-setting authority (which are presently subject to legal challenges by the insurance industry), and would allow insurance companies writing insurance policies for automobile, homeowners, and workers' compensation to automatically allow increases in insurance rates (making them subject to legal challenges by the Insurance Commissioner).

FURTHERMORE, BE IT RESOLVED that this county convention firmly believes that shifting the burden of proof from the insurance industry to the Commissioner of Insurance is a dramatic change in the law that will enable insurance carriers to charge basically whatever they want, and that this shifting of the burden of proof will also put the costs of legal challenges on the State - that is, the taxpayers - rather than on insurance companies.

MOREOVER, BE IT RESOLVED that this legislation, if passed, would sharply restrict the ability of the Insurance Commissioner to protect the State's consumers and small businesses, disrupting a rate-setting system that has worked well for decades.

AND, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that this county convention expresses its opposition to Senate Bill 901 and House Bill 1430 and strongly encourages its legislative delegation to do all in its power to oppose and defeat this legislation or any other legislation like it - this session and in any future session. This legislation does nothing except guarantee insurance premium increases for most consumers and small businesses, and strip the Insurance Commissioner of his authority.

This the 21st day of April, 2007.