Last night was a big night in the tiny world of Brooklyn reform Democratic politics. Both the Independent Neighborhood Democrats (IND) and the Central Brooklyn Independent Democrats (CBID) had big meetings. I attend IND, so can go into some detail about that but can only summarize CBID's meeting, which my wife attended.

CBID, the more progressive of the clubs and one which I recently wrote about how they can do good things when everyone behaves, had it's much expected civil war last night with its two main factions fighting it out tooth and nail. I saw last January's version of this and liken it to ancient Rome's public entertainment in the Coliseum: gladiators, wild beast fights and public executions. Last night's meeting was apparently similar. Much fighting, one side won big, the other side is threatening to take their marbles and go home. My wife, being one of only a handful of people both factions like, was re-elected to the Executive Board and was elected Corresponding Secretary (congratulations!). My wife and I agree that our interactions with BOTH sides have largely been fine and BOTH sides are pretty active. We by and large agree with BOTH sides on almost every issue except how they interact with eachother. Which brings up the interesting point that both sides by and large seem to agree with eachother on almost every issue except how they interact with eachother. The defeated faction has already been taking an interest in another club that I have heard good things about, Brooklyn Democrats for Change, and there has been talk of formation of yet another club. For my wife and myself, CBID is practically around the corner and, along with IND, cover the territories we live and play in, so we are likely to stay focused on those two clubs. But to Brooklyn Democrats for Change and any other new reform or progressive minded clubs: we wish you luck and look forward to working with you in the future. And my hope for both CBID factions: let's cool off a bit and try working together. There are far more important things at stake than who controls the quarum calls at one club in Central Brooklyn.

IND's meeting was far more sedate, though some may remember that a short time ago I had my complaints about IND as well. IND has its fights as well, but more often than not those have to do with who supports which candidate while at CBID people seem to agree on candidates more but fight over personality conflicts. IND has not had their elections yet, but last night they had their nominations. I was nominated to their executive board, despite the fact that some of what I wrote about them last year ruffled quite a few feathers. Some of those whose feathers I'd ruffled suggested that first pissing off key members is a perfectly traditional way to make an entrance onto IND's executive board. I get the impression a good fight is appreciated at IND, and once the fight is over, people get together again and move on. That suits me just fine. Thanks to Devin Cohen for nominating me (I didn't get a chance to thank him last night!) and thanks to many IND members for welcoming me.

Most of IND's meeting last night was a very interesting series of good speakers. Velmanette Montogomery and Joan Millman discussed the discussion in the State Legislature of how we may now elect judges in NY State now that the old, corrupt system of judicial conventions has been declared unconstitutional. This fight comes right as former Brooklyn Democratic Party Chair, Clarence Norman, faces new indictments for selling a judgeship for $50,000...and $6,000 in postage stamps. POSTAGE STAMPS??? Interesting. Clarence Norman and new party chair Vito Lopez together allegedly sold judgeships to such a blatant degree that it became an embarrassment to the local party.. Now the State Legislature has a chance to change things. Some of the ideas being kicked around include open elections, which has the advantage of making judges more directly accountable to the public, but also politicizes the judiciary, something which can be a big negative. If state-level judicial elections come about, then there is a discussion of giving a break to already sitting judges because they have actually been legally forbidden to be directly involved in politics for 14 years, putting them at a disadvantage. There is discussion of redistricting to make the districts smaller. To give you an idea of the size of districts, one district includes all of Kings and Richmond counties. That is not only a huge case load, but would make elections a nightmare for someone whose expertise is legal, not political. Keep an eye open for the hearings coming up on this issue. It is an area where we are getting real reform.

And speaking of reform, we had a guest from Queens: Assemblyman Michael Gianaris. He is pushing non-partisan redistricting and here is an important point. When the Republicans gain control, they redistrict to create new districts for themselves, legally, but immorally, gerrymandering, carving up districts for purely political reason. (Side note: Gianaris pointed out it was his overzealous pushing of partisan redistricting that led to the arrest of Tom DeLay). Now that the Democrats are in power in Albany, we are talking NONPARTISAN (or bipartisan) redistricting. Gianaris put it well: let's focus on doing it fairly and getting it right, leading to more competitive races. That's why I am a Democrat, we think like that more often than Republicans seem to. Gianaris also discussed just how disgusting and horrible Con/Ed is and how terribly they handled last year's blackout. He pointed out something that is really pretty un-American: Con/Ed has an indefinite franchise on our energy grid. There is no review, no competition. That isn't right!

Hakeem Jeffries dropped by and I have to say it was the first time I saw him where he was amiable. I have written about how I always found him surly and unfriendly. Last night I saw his better side, I guess, and he came off much better than I'd seen him before. Good luck to him.

We also head from yet another candidate to replace Yvette Clarke in the 40th City Council District, Mohammed "Moe" Razvi. Earlier I reported on my impressions of Zenobia McNalley and Jesse Hamilton after hearing them at CBID. I liked both. Well, based only on a naive impression from last night (and I am trying to keep a naive open mindedness to all candidates to start with), I also liked Razvi. He is a Pakistani immigrant who, like Zenobia and Jesse, has done a great deal of community involvement, which is one of my main criteria for judging candidates. He was a small businessman who started doing community work on his own after 9/11 and has focused on building collaborations and cooperation among many community groups as well as offering legal advice, computer classes and English instruction to community members. He was a very amiable man. He seems to have less previous political involvement than Zenobia and Jesse, but all three have been good community activists. So far I like all three, though I have to say Razvi got no difficult questions last night. Definitely a softball evening for him and I would like to hear where he stands on several issues he didn't address last night, like Atlantic Yards, DRE machines and the recent attacks on the freedom of assembly of New Yorkers. Still, so far Zenobia McNally, Jesse Hamilton and Moe Razvi seem to make a very good, very community-oriented field of candidates. I will report on other candidates if and when I meet them.

Several people brought up perhaps the most important state-level thing right now: the special election for State Senate. The bottom line, SUPPORT Craig Johnson for State Senate! THAT we all can agree on in both CBID and IND.