Last Updated on February 27, 2024 by BVN
S. E. Williams
Black women have been saving the Democratic Party. But, does the Democratic Party support Black women?
The answer seems obvious as Black women continue to be woefully underrepresented at the federal and state levels among elected officials and political candidates.
Politics is a cynical and dirty game where white guys with money, whether Democrat or Republican, continue to have the advantage.
Take the California Senate race for example. There are no less than 22 candidates competing and yet two white guys consider each other as the only real competition in the field—Democrat Adam Schiff and Republican Steve Garvey.
As noted by BVN reporter, Breanna Reeves, in California Senate Race: Schiff, Porter Lead in Polls Ahead of Primary Elections, there are however, four candidates who have actually emerged as frontrunners. Beyond Schiff and Garvey, there are also Democratic House Representatives. Katie Porter and Barbara Lee. Porter is ahead of Garvey by one percentage point in the polls for a tenuous second place, claiming 19% and 18% respectively in a recent poll, while Schiff is firmly leading with 24% and Lee, the only Black among those leading in the race, is a distant fourth, barely making double digits (10%) in the polls.
Schiff, after outspending his rivals last year, finished 2023, with $35M in cash on hand—reportedly more than all the other candidates combined. He is the obvious darling of Democratic Party leadership which makes it clear that although party bosses may talk a good line when in pursuit of Black women voters, the party can’t seem to put real support or money behind viable Black women candidates–even those eminently qualified like Lee and this, despite there not being a single elected Black woman in the U.S. Senate. Truth be told, Black women have remained a rarity in the U.S. Senate, having a presence in the esteemed chamber only 11 of the 235 years since it first convened in 1789.
Despite the the Democratic Party’s awakening in recent years to the reality that Black women are the mainstay of its constituency, it still can’t help but use the same stale political double speech and disingenuous sleight of hand to try and have it both ways with Black women voters as if we are too dense to figure out the game.
“Black women ain’t bitter. They are just tired of being expected to settle for less.”
Issa Rae
Take for example Newsom’s new rule when it was time to appoint someone to replace Dianne Feinstein after she passed away last year. Yes, he kept his commitment to appoint a Black woman but he simultaneously deprived the most competitive Black woman vying for the position, Barbara Lee, the advantage of incumbency, by appointing another Black woman, Laphonza Butler, to the position who expressed no interest or intention of running for the position to serve a full term.
He did this despite the fact that he had no reservations about giving Alex Padilla the incumbency advantage when Kamala Harris became Vice President just three short years ago. At that time, although he could have replaced the lone Black woman senator with another Black woman, he made a promise to do so in the future instead because in that moment, there was a greater need to secure his political bonafide with the Hispanic community. Certainly a Latino Senator from California was warranted and Padilla continues to do a good job.
So it begs the question regarding why he couldn’t muster the courage to do the same for a Black woman like Lee? The answer is obvious–someone else was being groomed by party bosses for the position–Adam Schiff.
By appointing another Black woman as a “placeholder” Newsom was able to say he kept his promise even though he simultaneously disadvantaged the most competitive Black woman in the state who was sincerely interested and imminently qualified. Also, in the process, he made the way much easier for the choice of Democratic party leadership and key party donors—Schiff.
It was a move with little risk for the Democratic Party, a clear advantage for Schiff and little loss of credibility for Newsom. After all, the party is confident Black voters will vote the Democratic ticket regardless; and those who follow politics know Lee does not accept PAC or lobbyist money so there was little chance of her raising the top dollars needed to increase her name recognition–something Newsom’s appointment could have assisted with and in doing so, possibly helped to level the playing field for her.
Lee has more than 34 years experience in the political arena—26 years in the U.S. House of Representative, co-chairs the House Policy and Steering Committee and has a seat on the powerful Appropriations Committee.
Before Newsom’s sleight of hand, Lee was considered a top choice for the Senate from the moment Newsom made his pledge to appoint a Black woman were Feinstein unable to complete her term.
One thing we know for sure, Lee has shown herself to be more courageous than what Newsom proved to be when he was under pressure to make the appointment to replace Feinstein despite his promise.
Lee showed her political courage in the wake of 911, when she stood as the lone member of the U.S. House and Senate combined to vote against former President George W. Bush’s foray into Iraq and Afghanistan.
She was rewarded for her courage with death threats and calls of “traitor”.
Through it all, she held true to what she called the central theme of our democracy. She defined it as “[T]he requirement to offer a different point of view if we think that the mainstream point of view is not what’s gonna keep us safe and secure.”
She stood on the point of righteousness and more than two decades later, most agree that she, alone among her peers, made the correct call.
The day she cast her vote she declared how she relied on, “My moral compass, my conscience, and my gut for direction,” something we certainly need more of in today’s political arena where political expediency too often takes precedence over everything else–including morality.
Even now, as most Democrats are dancing around the atrocities of Israel in Gaza and President Joe Biden has tied himself to Israeli President Benjamin Netanyahu, who, not unlike former U.S. President Donald Trump, is facing serious criminal charges including fraud, breach of trust and accepting bribes in three separate scandals involving media moguls and wealthy associates, Lee has called for a permanent ceasefire between Israel and Hamas. Although she affirms Israel deserves to be secure, she expressed her belief that America needs to “prioritize our investments into preventing wars and into development and diplomacy and humanitarian [support]…” while affirming the military solution will always be there.
A real concern continues to exist among many Black women, that we are not being heard, that we cast our votes, but are not represented, that promises are made, and then indiscriminately broken.
There is no guarantee that Lee would have won this year’s primary and if she prevailed there was no certainty she would be elected in November. But, what she deserved was the same opportunity that has been afforded to other political players in years passed. She deserved for Newsom to keep his promise–fairly. She deserved a chance to run as an incumbent. After 34 years of loyalty to the Democratic Party, she deserved their loyalty in return.
Instead, what she got, what Black women voters got, was a reminder that no matter how many votes Black women cast, we remain part of a caste system where the political rules of the game are different for us. This too must change. Is Newsom and the state Democratic party ready to enshrine it into law that no competitive candidate in the future will ever be appointed to complete an unfinished term of office so that no one in the future will ever again have the advantage of incumbency? I doubt it.
Of course this is just my opinion. I’m keeping it real.