Release: Hyper-local Neighborhood Caucus Clubs Being Organized.

(PLEASE FORWARD. THANKS! John)

From: Save the Caucus.

Contact: John Wren, cell (720)495-4949

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

October 20, 2016

Hyper-local Neighborhood Caucus Clubs Being Organized.

“Fresh leadership is always needed in both major political parties, so we will help them both.”

Denver—Save the Caucus, a Colorado political committee formed this year to fight what has become Propositions 107 and 108, today announced a project for hyper-local civic education to increase informed participation in the Colorado Caucus in 2018. www.Meetup.com/Caucus-Clubs (303)861-1447

Making the announcement long-time community activist John Wren said, "Hyper-local neighborhood Caucus Clubs will be promoted through Nextdoor.com and local community newspapers. Caucus Clubs will welcome new neighbors and invite everyone in the neighborhood to social events and educational activities in the neighborhood, in cooperation with local chambers, local community newspapers, service clubs, etc. 

"Caucus Clubs will not take political positions, except on legislation that effects the Colorado Caucus, nor will we endorse candidates or issues. Like the Denver City Club (I'm a former member and past President) our purpose will be 'to inform not reform.' We will cooperate with everyone interested in strengthening the grassroots in business and politics, and we will inform newcomers of their precinct committee people for both major political parties and we will give them subscription information for local publications and performing arts groups," said Wren

 "We are going to need a lot of help to make this happen. Anyone who'd like to be a part of it is encouraged to check out the Caucus Clubs link on www.COCaucus.org orwww.SmallBizChamber.org or go directly to www.Meetup.com/Caucus-Clubs. Those who like the idea are asked to Tweet us @IDEACafe or @BuildBetterCO."

###

Save the Caucus is a Colorado political committee. 1881 Buchtel Blvd. #501, Denver, CO 80210 (303)861-1447 www.COCaucus.org John Wren is the registered agent. He co-founded the 2002 Save the Caucus which defeated the Caucus-killer Amendment 29 60% 40%  despite being outspent 1400 to 1. 

“Why is the Colorado Caucus withering? First, because the legislature, in an ineffectual grab for national headlines, created a meaningless Presidential Primary that eliminated the headline race that once inspired much caucus activism.

“Second, because we're all getting good at sitting on the sidelines. The Kettering Foundation's David Mathews once reminded readers that the word idiot comes from the Greeks. Privacy, they thought, was akin to stupidity. "Idiots" were incapable of finding their place in the social order.

“Why bow to the trend of letting the next guy do it? Why sell out to letting money replace shoe-leather at every level of American politics?”

Sue O’Brien, Editorial Page Editor, Denver Post

From her “Caucuses aren’t for ciphers.” October 6, 2002., complete text on www.COCaucus.org 

It takes a village...

New service to turn your neighborhood into a real village. Watch this: Yesterday's (Fri, 4/28) Startup Show, on Colorado Caucus.

Caucus News

Colorado Caucus articles and videos posted each day on http://Facebook.com/Colorado.Caucus.News

Your comments there are very welcome, we just ask that there be no personal attacks, off subject comments, rants, or over-posting (one comment is usually best, on rare occasions two, if there is more link to another URL where you and whoever you are engaging can have an extended conversation.

Questions about the Colorado political process?

Information about the Colorado Caucus from the Colorado Secretary of State: http://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/Candidates/FAQs/caucuses.html

Don't forget to affiliate with the major political party of your choice by January 4 to be able to participate in the March 1 Colorado Caucus in your neighborhood. For more see the video below:

Be a reporter on the Colorado Caucus News team!

You are invited to a free online workshop for people who are interested in being certified as a Colorado Caucus News reporter. We intend to provide overnight reporting on the 6000 gatherings that will be held across Colorado the first Tuesday in March next year. To get more information see http://www.WrenCollege.org

If you'd be willing to be part of the leadership team as a webmaster, County Publisher or District Editor, please call John Wren at (303)861-1447. If you get voice mail leave a complete message, your name, phone number, and political and media experience. Thanks!

Caucuses aren't for ciphers. Sue O'Brien.

Sue O'Brien wrote in this editorial in 2002 when our wonderful Colorado Caucus, our neighborhood system for nominating candidates to the primary ballot was in danger of being eliminated by Amendment 29. Partly because of Sue's and The Denver Post's strong support of the Colorado Caucus, the misguided Amendment 29 was defeated.

Sue's wonderful column is maybe the best writing that's ever been done about why the caucus-assembly system is worth preserving. Here's what Sue wrote in the Denver Post:

Caucuses aren't for ciphers
October 6, 2002
by Sue O'Brien

cipher - a person or thing of no importance or value; nonentity

- New World College Dictionary

So, what will we choose to be: ciphers or individuals?

Ciphers are faceless. They have value only as something to count - a signature on a petition or a vote to tally by machine. It's easy for ciphers to hide out. Hey, they're just part of the mob.

Individuals, by contrast, stand out. They take responsibility. And they rarely hide.

We have a sovereign opportunity to become ciphers this November. One of the few mechanisms left in modern politics that rewards individual initiative - the precinct caucus - is on the brink of being eliminated in favor of a political nominating system that would let wannabe candidates get on the ballot only by collecting - and counting - petition signatures.

It's a lousy proposal put forth by an otherwise admirable organization: the Bighorn Center for Public Policy.

Now, I have nothing against getting on the ballot by petition. But why eliminate the choice - caucus or petition - that our present system provides?

It's not as though there's something inherently wrong with the caucus. And, even though these grassroots conclaves have seen declining attendance in recent years, there's a lot inherently good about them.

Look around modern society. We have a woeful lack of what Harvard scholar Robert Putnam calls "social capital" - the dynamism that comes from doing things together and making community decisions together. Yet the spate of election "reforms" we're seeing these days almost seems designed to stomp out the last vestiges of community collaboration.

"Voting and following politics are relatively undemanding forms of participation," writes Putnam in his influential "Bowling Alone." "In fact, they are not, strictly speaking, forms of social capital at all, because they can be done utterly alone."

We can be utterly alone, too, when we perform the two other actions modern politics seems to want to limit us to: writing checks and watching attack ads on TV. We're systematically replacing "social capital" with plain old monetary capital.

Colorado's traditional caucus-convention system, in contrast, rewards the shoe-leather and diligence. It provides a low-cost way for aspirants to work the neighborhoods, investing energy instead of dollars. Recent proof of this pudding came in the race for the GOP nomination in the 7th Congressional District, where Rick O'Donnell captured first line on the primary ballot with a low-budget campaign that focused on traditional caucus and door-to-door campaigning. O'Donnell eventually lost the primary to the better-funded Bob Beauprez, but his achievement in getting on the ballot was impressive.

But even more important than the caucus' benefits for candidates is its benefit for ordinary citizens. It's a vibrant neighborhood forum for hashing out ideas - the last remaining arena in which you can get on the first rung of the ladder toward political effectiveness by just showing up.

I've covered precinct or town caucuses in Iowa, Maine, Minnesota and Mississippi as well as Colorado. My favorite memory is of escorting a big-deal network analyst to his very first caucus in an American Legion hall in Iowa. This was a political expert well into his 50s, yet he'd never seen a caucus; primaries had always been his beat. He was blown away. For the first time in years of covering politics, he told me, he'd seen the true face of America.

He was right. Caucuses offer a peculiarly intimate view of a community and its people. They'll amaze you with the quality of caring and thought participants bring to the discussion. And sometimes, if you're very lucky, you'll see new, young leaders find their first toehold in the process.

Why is the Colorado caucus withering? First, because the legislature, in an ineffectual grab for national headlines, created a meaningless presidential primary that eliminated the headline race that once inspired much caucus activism.

Second, because we're all getting good at sitting on the sidelines. The Kettering Foundation's David Mathews once reminded readers that the word idiot comes from the Greeks. Privacy, they thought, was akin to stupidity. "Idiots" were incapable of finding their place in the social order.

Why bow to the trend of letting the next guy do it? Why sell out to letting money replace shoe-leather at every level of American politics?

Why not keep the caucus as an open door to involvement, while continuing to provide the petition alternative? Bighorn's goal may be to increase the number of people peripherally involved in the process - but the initiative will never replace the quality of participation the caucus can provide.

Good political talk … is where we recognize the connectedness of things - and our own connectedness. … Good political talk is also where we discover what is common amidst our differences. -David Mathews, "Civic Intelligence"

Sue O'Brien was editor of the Denver Post editorial page. See passed on not long after writing this. 

Tomorrow I'll be back with more about how I first became an Active Citizen and how you can be one too if you're not already.

In the mean time, your feed back is very helpful. Post your questions and comments here or contact me directly. (303)861-1447 or http://www.JohnWren.com 

Please share this with your friends on the Internet, it's as easy as just pushing one of the buttons below for Facebook, Twitter, Blogger.com, etc. 

John S. Wren

(303)861-1447

My friend Sue O'Brien wrote in this editorial in 2002 when our wonderful Colorado Caucus, our neighborhood system for nominating candidates to the primary ballot, was in danger of being killed by Amendment 29. Partly because of Sue's and The Denver Post's strong support of the Colorado Caucus, the misguided Amendment 29 was defeated.

Sue's wonderful column is still very much worth reading as a reminder of why the caucus-assembly system is worth preserving, warts and all. I hope someone forwards a copy of this to the Republican National Committee, which is considering whether or not to ban the caucus as a way to pick the delegates who nominate the RNC's Presidential candidate.  Here's what Sue wrote in the Denver Post:

Caucuses aren't for ciphers
October 6, 2002
by Sue O'Brien

cipher - a person or thing of no importance or value; nonentity

- New World College Dictionary

So, what will we choose to be: ciphers or individuals?

Ciphers are faceless. They have value only as something to count - a signature on a petition or a vote to tally by machine. It's easy for ciphers to hide out. Hey, they're just part of the mob.

Individuals, by contrast, stand out. They take responsibility. And they rarely hide.

We have a sovereign opportunity to become ciphers this November. One of the few mechanisms left in modern politics that rewards individual initiative - the precinct caucus - is on the brink of being eliminated in favor of a political nominating system that would let wannabe candidates get on the ballot only by collecting - and counting - petition signatures.

It's a lousy proposal put forth by an otherwise admirable organization: the Bighorn Center for Public Policy.

Now, I have nothing against getting on the ballot by petition. But why eliminate the choice - caucus or petition - that our present system provides?

It's not as though there's something inherently wrong with the caucus. And, even though these grassroots conclaves have seen declining attendance in recent years, there's a lot inherently good about them.

Look around modern society. We have a woeful lack of what Harvard scholar Robert Putnam calls "social capital" - the dynamism that comes from doing things together and making community decisions together. Yet the spate of election "reforms" we're seeing these days almost seems designed to stomp out the last vestiges of community collaboration.

"Voting and following politics are relatively undemanding forms of participation," writes Putnam in his influential "Bowling Alone." "In fact, they are not, strictly speaking, forms of social capital at all, because they can be done utterly alone."

We can be utterly alone, too, when we perform the two other actions modern politics seems to want to limit us to: writing checks and watching attack ads on TV. We're systematically replacing "social capital" with plain old monetary capital.

Colorado's traditional caucus-convention system, in contrast, rewards the shoe-leather and diligence. It provides a low-cost way for aspirants to work the neighborhoods, investing energy instead of dollars. Recent proof of this pudding came in the race for the GOP nomination in the 7th Congressional District, where Rick O'Donnell captured first line on the primary ballot with a low-budget campaign that focused on traditional caucus and door-to-door campaigning. O'Donnell eventually lost the primary to the better-funded Bob Beauprez, but his achievement in getting on the ballot was impressive.

But even more important than the caucus' benefits for candidates is its benefit for ordinary citizens. It's a vibrant neighborhood forum for hashing out ideas - the last remaining arena in which you can get on the first rung of the ladder toward political effectiveness by just showing up.

I've covered precinct or town caucuses in Iowa, Maine, Minnesota and Mississippi as well as Colorado. My favorite memory is of escorting a big-deal network analyst to his very first caucus in an American Legion hall in Iowa. This was a political expert well into his 50s, yet he'd never seen a caucus; primaries had always been his beat. He was blown away. For the first time in years of covering politics, he told me, he'd seen the true face of America.

He was right. Caucuses offer a peculiarly intimate view of a community and its people. They'll amaze you with the quality of caring and thought participants bring to the discussion. And sometimes, if you're very lucky, you'll see new, young leaders find their first toehold in the process.

Why is the Colorado caucus withering? First, because the legislature, in an ineffectual grab for national headlines, created a meaningless presidential primary that eliminated the headline race that once inspired much caucus activism.

Second, because we're all getting good at sitting on the sidelines. The Kettering Foundation's David Mathews once reminded readers that the word idiot comes from the Greeks. Privacy, they thought, was akin to stupidity. "Idiots" were incapable of finding their place in the social order.

Why bow to the trend of letting the next guy do it? Why sell out to letting money replace shoe-leather at every level of American politics?

Why not keep the caucus as an open door to involvement, while continuing to provide the petition alternative? Bighorn's goal may be to increase the number of people peripherally involved in the process - but the initiative will never replace the quality of participation the caucus can provide.

Good political talk … is where we recognize the connectedness of things - and our own connectedness. … Good political talk is also where we discover what is common amidst our differences. -David Mathews, "Civic Intelligence"

Sue O'Brien was editor of the Denver Post editorial page.