Politics

His Bold Idea: Move HQ to Detroit to Show 'What the Democratic Party Stands For'

January 14, 2017, 2:50 PM by  Alan Stamm

A shake-things-up suggestion surfaces as the Democratic National Committee meets this weekend in Phoenix to hear pitches by candidates for party leader.


Phil Angelides: Detroit "rents are one-third to one-half of what’s charged in D.C."

"I can think of no better way for the DNC’s new chair to signal a fresh start than by setting up the party’s headquarters in Detroit, Michigan—not Washington, D.C.," writes Phil Angelides, a former California party chair and state treasurer.

"A little more heartland and a little less Beltway would be good for the soul and perspective of the Democratic Party," he adds Friday in a Politico Magazine commentary, .

Angelides anticipates resistance, brushes off concern about convenience and mentions cost savings:

Some may worry about the logistics of moving the party’s headquarters out of the nation’s capital. But phones and the Internet work just fine in Detroit.

Plus, the city is within easy driving distance of key states like Pennsylvania, Ohio and Wisconsin; and its airport has flights to cities across the country, including 26 nonstop daily flights to Washington, just 95 minutes away.

Party operations that need to be located in D.C. can stay there; and any space freed up in the current headquarters can be leased at Washington’s premium rents to help pay for the Detroit office, where rents are one-third to one-half of what’s charged in D.C.

Here's more from his pitch in a publication related to the influential Politico news site:

The difficult task of once again becoming a truly national governing party is more likely to succeed if the effort is anchored in the heart of the country. . . .

Setting up shop in the heartland would also speak volumes about what the Democratic Party stands for and for whom it is fighting. It would send a strong signal that the party is serious about devoting resources to organizing efforts in all those states and communities across the country where Democrats need to get back in the game. . . .

Where an organization is headquartered matters—how we see the world is no small part shaped by the people with whom we interact and the communities in which we live.

In one local reaction, Crain's Detrout Business editor and publisher Ron Fournier calls the suggested move a "damn fine idea" in a tweet linking to the commentary.

In a Metro Times blog post Saturday, managing editor Michael Jackman says: "We’re for anything that could conceivably help boost our local fortunes."

Still, he thinks the notion "sounds bizarre" and brings to mind "the 1991 film flop ["The Super"] that starred Joe Pesci as the slumlord forced to live under house arrest in his own rattletrap apartment building until it’s brought up to code."

Mixed views also emerge in a Reddit thread with 60 comments. A sampling:

► The Dems do have a problem with being a party of "elites" rather than a party of the middle/working class. So the optics of moving from D.C. to Detroit make sense.
From Detroit's perspective, it is a mixed bag. But I do think liberal headquarters in Detroit may help spur public investment in schools, healthcare, etc., in the city - which is a positive in my opinion for many of the poorer residents.

► Oh Jesus, please God no. Becoming ground zero for national political grandstanding is the last thing the metro area needs.

► I'd take them. They'll lease office space, draw reporters, and generally help the perception of the City. Plus, the points about Democrats getting back in touch with the Rust Belt are important.
It might also help the feckless Michigan Democratic Party, which frequently seems to be an arm of the teacher's union, rather than an organization fighting for social, economic, and environmental justice.


Read more:  Politico Magazine


Leave a Comment:

Photo Of The Day