War vs. Peace in the Democratic Party

The Cabrillo Marine Aquarium in San Pedro seems an unlikely place for a discussion on Iraq, Iran, and America's constitutional crisis. Just steps away from the manicured beach sands, the aquarium's John M. Olguin Auditorium typically hosts lectures on crustaceans or kelp, but on a recent Monday night the crowd gathered at the door had war and peace on their minds.

The event, sponsored by the San Pedro Democratic Club, featured a panel discussion with former U.N. weapons investigator Scott Ritter, civil liberties attorney Stephen Rohde, and Marcy Winograd, congressional candidate in the 36th District. While the discussion was focused on issues related to U.S. conflicts abroad, the real goal was to introduce Winograd, the grassroots challenger to six-term incumbent and sometime Bush Democrat, Jane Harman. Standing at the podium in a dark navy jacket with a rhinestone peace sign pinned to her lapel, Winograd, 52, leaned into the microphone and declared, "This is not David versus Goliath, this is Marcy versus Jane."

On March 14, standing on the front lawn of a Mar Vista residence, Winograd announced the start of her campaign to unseat Harman, instantaneously transforming her from teacher and activist to politician. "I am running as a patriot," she said to a gathering of supporters, "to rekindle the wonderful spirit that is America and to recapture the soul of the Democratic Party."

Just one month after deciding to run, Winograd had already earned a number of respectable endorsements, including former state senator and peace activist Tom Hayden; author and political commentator Gore Vidal; Mimi Kennedy, national chair, Progressive Democrats of America; and the darling of the antiwar activists, Cindy Sheehan.

When Winograd stepped up to the podium at the Cabrillo auditorium, her list of endorsements had multiplied tenfold and she was buzzing from the momentum gathering around her campaign. In a surprising upset, her supporters had successfully blocked an early endorsement of Harman by the California Democratic Party at a delegate's caucus meeting in early April. "We created a human chain of Winograd signs through the hall," she says. "They took it to a voice vote and one-third of the people stood with me."

Winning 35 percent of the delegate vote prevented Harman from picking up her home district endorsement prior to the Democratic Party Convention in Sacramento.

That's a slap in the face for a six-term incumbent, but if Harman felt the sting, her flinch was barely perceivable. From her congressional office in Washington, D.C., the ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and member of the House Committee on Homeland Security was busy working on a bipartisan port security proposal that would dedicate federal anti-terrorist funding for Long Beach and L.A. ports. She also released several statements in April, one of which explained her reason for voting against a bill that authorizes appropriations for intelligence and intelligence-gathering activities in 2007.

"For the first time in my congressional career," states Harman, "I voted 'no' on an Intelligence Authorization bill to send the strong signal that I oppose the legal rationale offered by the Bush administration for the NSA domestic surveillance program."

Harman's "first time" confession says a lot about her record. She voted in favor of the USA Patriot Act three times, and supported the indefinite detention of prisoners at Guantánamo Bay. And like the majority of her peers, Harman was in favor of authorizing military force in Iraq and three years of "emergency" funding bills to pay for it. For progressive Democrats, these votes are grounds for removal.

"The Bush agenda brought on this war and Democrats acquiesced," says Winograd. "They betrayed their own party, country, and peace-loving nations. Who does Harman work for? What drives her to champion preemptive war?"