How would you feel if your local Chamber of Commerce sponsored a Mitt Romney "event?"

[Amerigo Vespucci]

So here I am last week, sitting in a local Silicon Valley Chamber of Commerce monthly luncheon.

At the end of the meeting the President says that he has one more announcement.

"This will be an opportunity for you to meet Republican presidential candidate..."

A moderate chorus of "boos" rose up in the crowd, countered by a few brownshirts across the room saying "SHUT UP!"

"...MITT ROMNEY..."

Now the boos got louder, and so did the brownshirts. Noticeable tension in the room.

The Chamber positioned it as "an informational event."

I kind of see it as "separation of church & state"...I'm offended by the notion of paying yearly Chamber dues that are used to schedule GOP infomercials.

Granted, they could have had representation from Democratic and Independent candidates for a more balanced "information evening," but Mitt?

The San Jose Chamber is one of two Silicon Valley Chambers that's participating in this. Apparently they didn't learn their lesson when they were handed their ass by Cindy Chavez (see below).

What do you think?

Note: I've met Pat Dando, pictured below, at Chamber events. She's very charming.

:sarcasm:

When she wanted to get the crowd's attention so she could speak she yelled into the microphone

"HEY! BE...QUIET...NOW."

She stood silent for a few moments, glaring at the crowd, then proceeded with her prepared remarks. She was late for the event. She neither apologized for nor acknowledged her lateness. She speaks in a nasal monotone drone and never once came near a smile. Oh, that Pat!

:grouphug:

Ever Aftermath: San Jose Chamber of Commerce president Pat Dando says the legitimate content of COMPAC's mailers got lost in the subsequent finger-pointing.

Between the Sheets

As the SJ Chamber of Commerce takes San Jose to federal court over their controversial fliers, the question becomes: How did we get here, anyway?

By Vrinda Normand

July 19-25, 2006

http://www.metroactive.com/metro/07.19.06/san-jose-chamber-of-commerce-0629.html

TWO MONTHS ago, the San Jose Chamber of Commerce managed to incite the biggest fuss about "negative campaigning" in this year's entire election season thus far. In May, the Chamber's political arm, COMPAC, sent out 300,000 colorful fliers to San Jose residents, which critics from the labor movement condemned as "vitriolic mass mailings" and the "most massive violation of election law in San Jose's entire history." A hailstorm of indignant accusations rained down from the mainstream press and various groups supporting San Jose mayoral candidate Cindy Chavez. They attacked the fliers as "hit pieces" without disputing the actual content.

Meanwhile, Chamber leaders, including president Pat Dando, believe critics got lost in finger pointing and distorted the actual purpose of the fliers. Dando says that what people should have been asking is: "What happened to a fairly sedate organization like the Chamber of Commerce to inspire them to finally become more aggressive politically?"

Last week, COMPAC sued San Jose in federal court, claiming the city's finding that the fliers violated campaign regulations is unconstitutional. How did it come to this? We decided the best way to answer that question was to take a look back at how this widely misunderstood controversy actually played out. So we start our timeline in January, when the first seeds of the COMPAC campaign were planted.

Jan. 6
The board of directors for the San Jose Chamber of Commerce meets for a retreat at a classy, coastal resort in Aptos. While discussing a number of goals for the year to come, Chamber president Pat Dando brings up the San Jose mayoral race. She says she would like to see the Chamber take a more aggressive political role. In previous years, the organization's relatively timid tactics have not been successful in getting business-friendly candidates elected. Labor proponents back a majority of the current San Jose City Council, and Chamber spokesman Bob Hines says board members agreed with the need for a stronger influence in local government. Documents show that he and Dando had already begun communicating with their attorney, Russ Miller, about legal options for launching a campaign in this direction.

[Eric J in MN]

1. Was Mitt Romney there that night, or was she announcing a future Mitt Romney event? NT

NT

[Amerigo Vespucci]

4. Mitt wasn't there.

I'm referencing two separate events: the Chamber luncheon last week and a tri-Chamber event several weeks ago with Pat Dando representing the San Jose Chamber.

Pat Dando wasn't the president who announced the event last week. The only reason I mentioned her in the story is that her Chamber is co-sponsoring the event.

The Chamber president who did announce the upcoming Mitt-fest did so defensively. I can't remember his exact opening statement but it was something in the spirit of "before you react to this..."

But then he said the words "Republican presidential candidate" and there was an audible chorus of boos, followed by a reaction to the boos.

I didn't write down the date, and the Chamber hasn't posted it on their Web Site. Romney has an upcoming fundraiser in nearby Atherton and he might be doing it on the same day.

:patriot:

[Eric J in MN]

9. Maybe you can get them to also do an event involving a Democatic candidate for some office.

I don't think it's so bad if they also do an event with a Democratic politician.

UPDATE: Ideally, they would have chosen a more decent Republican than Romney if they wanted to promote a Republican at all. I meant that doing both Republican events and Democratic events in the general sense isn't so bad.

[Amerigo Vespucci]

11. Yes, that's what I think they should have done in the first place...

If they felt the need to get into this at all, I would have liked to have seen a "round robin"...Democratic, Republican AND Independent candidates on the same evening, each taking three one hour shifts with breaks in between so that if a person wanted to they could hear all three candidates in one evening.

At the event I referenced with Pat Dando ("be...quiet...NOW") I turned to a colleague after she spoke and said "That's got to be one of the most unpleasant people I've ever met." His response was "Word on the street is that Pat is moving toward other opportunities."

So who knows...maybe she's eyeballing a paid position somewhere in the GOP.

All I know is this:

You thought of including Democrats, and I thought of including Democrats, and the two chambers that are presenting this "Mitt event" didn't...and I don't believe for a minute that it was anything less than deliberate. That was exclusion by choice, not an "oversight" on the part of the Chamber.

:patriot:

[Cha]

2. Aren't chamber of commerces

known repuke strongholds, anyway?

mitt's a fascist, though..and pat dando, she looks like she could eat ya up and spit ya before breakfast.

[wtmusic]

5. Looks like a blood relative of ET nt

[sandnsea]

3. Funded by tourism tax dollars

To guarantee nobody but the good old boys ever succeed.

[Amerigo Vespucci]

7. I turned down an opportunity to join the San Jose Chamber...

...I didn't meet with Pat, but I went to their offices and had a one hour meeting in which I found out that:

1). For $350 I could join but I had to use MY name, not my COMPANY name, and I couldn't join any of the networking events or attend any of the social events / mixers

2). To join using my company name would cost $500 and up, depending on the membership plan I chose

3). Their big selling point was the Chamber's political activism, which is...you guessed it...an aggressive "red state" agenda

4). Competition in the Chamber for business leads, networking, etc. would have been mind-numbingly impossible.

So my major concern isn't the San Jose Chamber or Pat Dando. It's the fact that other, previously "neutral" Chambers are getting in bed with them and co-sponsoring their agenda.

[patrice]

6. Very Angry. You really should consider not paying dues anymore.

Create a flier and Tell them Romney is supported by War Profiteers who are responsible for interfering with any possible chance for "success" that our military ever had in Iraq.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1878766

Start a counter CoC.

[Amerigo Vespucci]

8. I'm working on a draft letter to the Chamber president who made the announcement...

...and I intend to include a copy of the Metro article I linked to in my original post.

The message, as politely and professionally as I can deliver it, will be "go down this road and you go without me and my dollars."

:patriot:

[patrice]

10. Thank you for your courage and willingness to take that hit.

I know that's not a small matter for a business person, but we MUST begin to create a new culture, so Grassroots models are very important.

[Amerigo Vespucci]

12. Chambers are like governments...

...they are there for US. Not "some of us."

When a Chamber of Commerce chooses sides, the "good of the order" is no longer respected. It's a conscious decision on the part of the Chamber's leadership and they need to be held accountable for it.

:patriot:

[Raejeanowl]

13. Overstepping

I think I'd look for ways to burn some butt.

A Chamber of Commerce-usually a NOT FOR PROFIT organization-has no business (pun ironically intended) engaging in the actual promotion, advancement, and campaigning of political candidates. Do they really do things that differently on the Left Coast?

Chambers do sponsor "meet the candidates" forums for their memberships and the general community. These do NOT include "informational" meetings favoring the presentation of one candidate to the exclusion of others. Legitimate "Informational" meetings are held by incumbents, who have more information to disseminate than how great they are, vote for them.

Chamber legislative committee endeavors should be primarily issue-oriented. To the extent a candidate can be identified as business-friendly (i.e., pledged to address and advance the issues and related legislation important to the Chamber membership) a chamber may come out and officially endorse. It would be HIGHLY irregular to do more for the candidate.

This isn't a separation of church and state issue, but at least one someone is flirting with ethics violations. You could check either with your Secretary of State's office (or whoever charters and regulates not-for-profits and non-profits in your state) or your State Ethics Commission (to see what they think about a candidate accepting such a "sponsored" event and how the candidate is supposed to report the event's value. Outside of whatever corporate charter is on file with the local authorities (and you may have to go to the county clerk first), the IRS non-profit or non-for-profit tax status of your chamber may also be threatened by engaging in such "aggressive" political activities-this is likely why they are consulting attorneys, to see how to get around the obstacles.

[AZBlue]

14. I'd be ok as long as the next one had a Dem candidate.

[WCGreen]

15. Come on now, I joined the Chamber here for a while and quickly

realized that the discounts weren't worth the republican crap I had to endure at meetings...

I quit...