On May 23, 2010 I served as parliamentarian during the election convention of the California League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC). LULAC is the nation’s oldest and largest Latino civil rights organization.
In my own community (Jewish) we have the term “mishagas” to refer to intrigue and infighting in families or other forms of social organization. Amongst African-Americans, a term which fundamentally means the same thing is “Nigashit.” In the Latino community, the best term for the concept is “movidas.”
In all the years and all the organizations I’ve worked with, I have never seen a situation with so many individuals and factions that are constantly–I mean CONSTANTLY–engaged in movidas against all the other rival individuals and factions. What’s so unique about it is that from election to election, meeting to meeting, the various factions keep changing sides and alliances. Case in point: about seven years ago, at my very first board meeting of California LULAC, the immediate past state director leveled a denunciation of a former state director that fundamentally insinuated that he had embezzled funds. Now, years later, they find themselves on the same side, because they apparently decided that they hated the incumbent administration of LULAC more than they hate each other.
Anyway, one faction shows up with fees for 40 delegates paid by one individual by corporate check. This block of delegates becomes the kingmaker and keeps changing sides from moment to moment. As a result of this “jefe” changing sides and telling his delegates how to vote, he winds up not being elected to anything he ran for personally. So what happens after the election: he puts a “stop-payment” on the check that paid the delegate fees for the 40 kingmaking delegates.
So of course, I’m in the middle of all this. As parliamentarian I’ve had to rule it like I see it. Those delegates didn’t have the right to vote at the convention. The election for officers is null and void because those votes made the difference between winners and losers. So, no matter how honest and accurate a parliamentary call I’ve made, I know that I’m a lightning rod to be attacked with a combination of movidas, mishagas, and nigashit all wrapped up into one.
Well, I see things are the same in LULAC in California as well as in Texas. I spent 34-years in LULAC, most of these years as an officer at some level. My last few years I served as chief-of-staff for a national president and as a national elected officer. I always wanted elections to be kept clean and honest, but it was not to be. The same situation you have presented is the same situation that exist at the national level. If you attend the national convention check out who is paying for all the delegates attending from Texas (especially from San Antonio) and the delegates coming from Puerto Rico. You will find out that it will probably be the national president supporting one of the two candidates coming out of San Antonio and running for president. I tried my best to have the voting be by written ballot and failed. I always thought LULAC was against the intimination of voters, but how can it be when it is practiced at its conventions. My hat is off to you, I believe you did the right thing regardless of whom it may upset.
Thank you for your support. This is a thankless task, but nobody told me it would be easy!
Venceremos, jbt