Comment: House Democrats managed to come together after a peculiar game of ‘chicken’
Josh Frost is the co-chair of Progressive Democrats of Hawaii, whose mission is to build unity among progressive individuals and advance progressive values in the Democratic Party of Hawaii.
Though I have discussed this issue at length with a few Progressive Democrats of Hawaii (PDH) members, the organization took no official position on the leadership fight. The following are my thoughts on the battle and its resolution.
The Capitol Building teemed with students, activists, lobbyists, and community members as the 26th Legislature of the State of Hawaii was gaveled into session on Wednesday.
While many were there for the food and festivities, I was there witnessing my first Opening Day from the public perspective and what I expected to be the ongoing battle between the two groups of Democratic legislators vying for control of the House. Though the small voyeuristic part in me was eager to see a protracted battle, I was curious how the dust would settle.
The rest of me, however, was quite pleased and relieved to hear an agreement had been reached early in the afternoon between Sylvia Luke’s “dissidents” and Calvin Say’s group of supporters.
As I watched the drama unfold over the last couple of months, it was interesting to hear from my friends and colleagues their various perspectives and interpretations of what was happening, who was to blame, and how it should be resolved. I have good relationships with members in both groups and I try not to choose sides without knowing all the details.
From my point of view, as an outside observer, both sides were complicit in the organizational delay and both sides had something to gain from the game of chicken they were playing.
I have to admit the notion of Say making a deal with the Republican Caucus to keep his position as Speaker filled me with a sense of foreboding, though I also understood the need to resolve what had become a protracted struggle for power. Say had the stronger and more numerous of the two groups and didn’t want to give away the store, so to speak, to keep the dissident Democrats in on a deal. He could get what he needed from the Republicans, without giving anything away and at the same time had the power to put the dissidents out in the cold, if he chose to do so. Despite the mounting public pressure to organize, I give credit to Say and his supporters for keeping level heads while continuing to negotiate.
Though I will admit to being confused, early on, as to what the dissidents’ strategy was given their numbers, the size of the dissident group has grown with each cycle and they are much stronger this year than in previous attempts. With this in mind, it’s easy to understand why they weren’t satisfied with what they had agreed to in previous years. So, despite the possibility of them losing the game and their bargaining power, it seems the dissidents were smart in holding their ground even though a deal between Say and the Republicans seemed eminent.
I admit a level of disappointment to see the leaders of the dissident group, Sylvia Luke and Scott Saiki, with no chairmanships or leadership positions. If the idea was to include in leadership a wider array of talent and ideas, excluding these two from any real sense of leadership or responsibility in decision-making is an unfortunate mistake.
Even though the fight created a holding pattern of sorts, I believe the result, in the end, was a positive one. The dissidents now hold a more proportionate percentage of leadership posts and committee chairmanships, Speaker Say was able to hold on to his position without a Republican deal, and both groups seem relieved and happy to have the battle behind them.
With the leadership fight settled, the legislative calendar finalized, and the committee chairmanships agreed to, it is now time to get down to business.
Related Story:
With chairmanships and leadership assigned, how did the House dissidents make out?