Mayor Ron Dellums

It took nearly two weeks of counting paper ballots, but this weekend it became official. Legendary, retired Bay Area congressman Ron Dellums is the new Mayor of Oakland. Dellums squeaked out his victory and avoided a run-off when he crossed the 50% mark by a razor-thin 155 votes out of more than 80,000 cast.

His nearest challenger, Oakland City Council President Ignacio De La Fuente conceded the victory on Saturday. Dellums served for nearly three decades in congress, and before retiring in 1999, firmly established a reputation as one of the most liberal representatives in the House. He was active in opposition to the war in Vietnam, to Reagan administration foreign policy and to U.S. nuclear policy. He also led campaigning against South African apartheid.

The 70-year-old former congressman made the decision to come out of political retirement last year as the Oakland Mayoral seat was set to become vacant. Twice-elected Mayor Jerry Brown was being termed out and Dellums began a vigorous campaign on a progressive platform. Though the election was hard-fought, his main rival De La Fuente is also a liberal Democrat. Mexican-born, and a former union official, De La Fuente had won the endorsement of former Mayor Brown as well as the majority of the City Council.

Dellums' re-emergence galvanized much of Oakland's sizeable progressive community and gave them a living icon around which to rally. But since his retirement from Congress, Dellums' latest career --as a lobbyist--was hardly as romantic as his tenure on the Hill. Some controversy was raised by Dellums' firm having represented a local nuclear lab, one of the country's major drug firms, and by helping Rolls Royce acquire contracts for the engines made for transport planes that carry troops to Iraq.

Oakland, which has long lived in the shadow of neighboring San Francisco, will confront Dellums with some serious challenges. It's a city that suffers a high crime rate, an extraordinarily large population of former convicts, and deep economic and social divides. Managing a city as a progressive chief executive will be a very different job than being a liberal legislator among scores of others. And no doubt Dellums will be closely scrutinized by many of the constituencies who have invested their hopes in him.

Mayor Brown had come to office under similar circumstances in 1998, promising progressive reform but he wound up emphasizing programs of crime control and downtown development. Some of Brown's liberal supporters were deeply disappointed by his tenure, though the former California governor leaves office with high favorability ratings. In the election of two weeks ago, Brown handily won the Democratic primary for state Attorney General getting more votes than any other statewide Democratic candidate.

Dellums takes office and replaces Brown on January 1. One of his first tasks will be to mend fences with De La Fuente who remains at the helm of the City Council and whose political cooperation will be key in providing a governing majority.

Comments (16)

1. Ron Dellums' aide wrote a letter to Maurice Bishop, Communist leader of Grenada during the 1982 invasion...it read:

   "Ron [Dellums] has become truly committed to Grenada, and has some positive political thinking to share with you…. He's really hooked on you and Grenada and doesn't want anything to happen to building the Revolution and making it strong."

   "He really admires you as a person and even more so as a leader with courage and foresight, principles and integrity…. The only other person that I know of that he expresses such admiration for is Fidel."

   It's the Dellums kind of "progressive"....that destroyed the Presidential ambitions of Democrats in the 70s and 80s.

   Posted by Mask at 06/19/2006 @ 07:01am

2. This guy should finish off Oakland.

   I like the Progressive stance he took as he "represented a local nuclear lab, one of the country's major drug firms, and by helping Rolls Royce acquire contracts for the engines made for transport planes that carry troops to Iraq."... Ah, a fraud,maybe? Cash pass hands?

   And the Grenda stance is realiiy inspiring...although, I'll bet Bolivia, Venezuela, and Iran are looking forwad to his potetial letters...Jeez...

   Posted by john maasch at 06/19/2006 @ 08:17am

3. MASK:

   Pretty remarkable you had access to an obscure letter from 1982. I'm curious. Is your name "MASK" true? Are you a Republican party operative assigned to mess around with liberals or do you have remarkable amounts of free time?

   Posted by trabaris at 06/19/2006 @ 09:52am

4. Posted by TRABARIS 06/19/2006 @ 09:52am | ignore this person

   In order...

   1. Called "Google"...check it out.

   2. "Mask" is not my real name......No sure where you're going with THAT?!?!?

   3. As I've noted here many times before, I'm a Clinton (Bill) DLC Dem (I know that's probably WORSE in your book than a "Republican operative"...but true).

   and 4. Didn't realize pointing out the radical politics of Mr Dellums was "messing around with liberals"...and it doesn't take much out of my day to check in here at "TN" blog!

   Posted by Mask at 06/19/2006 @ 10:04am

5. MASK:

   You a "DLC" Democrat? What hogwash! My ideology is pretty close to that (I believe in a balanced budget and strict separation of powers and a right to privacy but am liberal on social issues) All you do is repeat Republican Party talking points and trash every single idea on this website that does not comport with right wing views. If you're a Democrat I'm Ronald Reagan.

   Posted by trabaris at 06/19/2006 @ 10:10am

6. See, if you want great leadership you need to have alot of liberals living in your district. My district is fine, I have representatives that doesnt vote for George Bushs disasters, never has.

   All Conservatives can say is oh no, Dellums is a terrible guy. Why? Because he's a Communist - or something. Riiiight

   On another point, why is it that some of Bushs very most brilliant defenders come here day after day and use some ridiculous ruse that everyone sees through, its not even a satire. Conservatives are pathetic in their defense of what they have done.

   Posted by conshame at 06/19/2006 @ 10:19am

7. A tragicomedy in the making! Go Ron "Red" Dellums!!

   Posted by woodyee at 06/19/2006 @ 10:35am

8. Posted by TRABARIS 06/19/2006 @ 10:10am | ignore this person

   Not sure which "Republican talking points" I've used...examples?

   BTW, NONE of the things you said you support...would conflict with liberals ("balanced budget", "sep of powers", "right to privacy"....liberals also support those, they just support a balanced budget, balanced on the backs of enormous tax hikes to pay for social programs, etc)....so not sure where you separate yourself from them.

   So, do you support NAFTA, the 1996 welfare reform, "the era of Big Gov't is over"?....THOSE might separate you from the non-DLC types here.....they do me!

   Posted by Mask at 06/19/2006 @ 10:39am

9. Posted by CONSHAME 06/19/2006 @ 10:19am | ignore this person

   Sorry, CONSHAME, is there ANOTHER interpretation of this from Mr Dellums' aide?

   "He really admires you as a person and even more so as a leader with courage and foresight, principles and integrity…. The only other person that I know of that he expresses such admiration for is Fidel." ????

   Posted by Mask at 06/19/2006 @ 10:40am

10. Ohhh! Shame on Ron Dellums! One of his aides said that Ron Dellums expressed support of Maurice Bishop who overthrew PM Eric Gairy with a coup d'etat. Who was Eric Gairy? The thoroughly corrupt, brutal vote-rigger who made speeches at the UN revealing to the world his dealings with UFO's. All-in-all, a perfect candidate for the job of an American puppet, which is exactly what he was. Reagan's "Operation Urgent Fury" was America's response to the Grenadans ridding themselves of this cancer and it promptly followed that up by rigging the next "election" with black bag cash from the CIA. Isn't it clear as day? America and Eric Gairy are the good guys and Maurice Bishop was a bad, bad "Communist".

    A letter from an aide expressing her impressions of Ron Dellum's attitudes toward the new government in Grenada is exceedingly problematic, in any case, given that the aide could have been incorporating much of her own attitudes into the letter. But, if you want to attempt to smear someone you go with what you have. No letter with Ron Dellums signature on it? That's OK, go with a letter from someone else expressing their opinions. That's good enough for the right-wing trash machine that MASK chooses to align himself with.

    Millions of times more substantial was the following:

    In 1972, Dellums began his campaign to end the racial segregation "apartheid" policies of South Africa. Fourteen years later, the U.S. House of Representatives passed Dellums's anti-apartheid legislation, calling for a trade embargo against South Africa and immediate divestment by American corporations. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Dellums)

    How did the Republicans respond to this opposition to vicious racial bigotry? No surprises there:

    "Ronald Reagan called for a policy of "constructive engagement" and vetoed the bill. His veto was overridden; it was the first override in the 20th century of a foreign-policy veto."

    We can reasonably assume that MASK stood with the Republicans on that since he makes extensive use of all their talking points in every missive that he posts here, his protestations of being a DLC supporter notwithstanding. That tells us more about the DLC than it does about MASK. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck . . .

    Further to the point, Maurice Bishop was the leader of the Marxist New Jewel Movement political party. MASK chooses to imply that this makes him a "Communist". That's a leap considering that "Marxists" range from Joseph Stalin to the elected government of Sweden to imperialist tomtits like Christopher Hitchens.

    If Ron Dellums is a Communist sympathizer it's difficult indeed to understand the following comment from Tom Delay upon Dellum's retirement from the House:

    We are losing one of its finest Members, a Member that I have great respect for, because he always did his homework, was so articulate and eloquent on this floor. He always got my attention when he stood up and took the microphone. He would stop every Member in their tracks to hear what he had to say, and there are very few Members that have served in this body that can claim the respect that both sides of the aisle had for the gentleman from California. And the incredible reputation that the gentleman from California has brought to this House; he has elevated this House. He has elevated the distinction of this House by serving here, and this House will greatly miss him when he leaves."

    That places MASK comfortably to the right of Tom Delay and all the way out on the tippy end of the right-wing smear spectrum. Put MASK on the ignore list. He is just one of the more clever right-wingers lurking here, which isn't saying much.

    Posted by fromredbird at 06/19/2006 @ 11:57am

11. Posted by FROMREDBIRD 06/19/2006 @ 11:57am | ignore this person

    2 points...it wasn't the name "Maurice" in that note, FROM, it was "Fidel"...but if you want to defend Castro, go right ahead.

    and two, if the aide's note was WRONG...why didn't Dellums CORRECT it and state his unequivocal opposition of Castro and his regime???

    Posted by Mask at 06/19/2006 @ 12:06pm

12. "Put MASK on the ignore list. He is just one of the more clever right-wingers lurking here, which isn't saying much.

    Posted by FROMREDBIRD 06/19/2006 @ 11:57am | ignore this person

    BTW...even if I was a "clever right winger"...why do you want opposing view points "ignored"?

    Posted by Mask at 06/19/2006 @ 12:59pm

13. MASK:

    Actually, I did support NAFTA and welfare reform. I also believe the recent tax cuts that disproportionately benefit the rich should be revoked, and minimum wage raised. Do you? I bet not, since "Faux" News tells you not to support these things.

    Posted by trabaris at 06/19/2006 @ 1:10pm

14. Posted by TRABARIS 06/19/2006 @ 1:10pm | ignore this person

    Nope, you and I are in agreement on those, TRAB.

    Except....

    1. That if the evil Bush tax cuts are recinded, that no NEW spending gets to happen....that is if the libs and/or Dems who CLAIM to be "fiscal conservatives" are honest about that. No "universal health care program", no "restoring GOP budget cuts of the last 12 years", no "Apollo Program for alternative energy", etc., etc, etc......unless they are willing to ask for a tax INCREASE to pay for those things, since you can't have them AND a balanced budget.

    2. Minimum wage?...sure, bump it along the lines of the last bump, if you like.....BUT, no "living wage" vaguery that (when you can actually pin somebody down to define it) means a $8-10-12 hike.

    Posted by Mask at 06/19/2006 @ 1:42pm

15. It's the Dellums kind of "progressive"....that destroyed the Presidential ambitions of Democrats in the 70s and 80s.

    Posted by MASK 06/19/2006 @ 07:01am

    Funny . . . you're blank on the 1990's. You're here for only one reason- to introduce negativism into the discussion because of your hatred of progressivism. Your reactionary views are losing supporters day by day and the specter of an America that is more concerned about Americans than corporate plutocrats and is content to engage in relations based on mutual benefit with other countries has obviously unhinged you.

    Why else would you poise crouched like a praying mantis at this blog so that your comment can be the first one with each new posting? Stop googling for insubstantial negative tidbits about progressives and go see a psychiatrist.

    I'm logging in now so my ignore list will do it's good work and get rid of your "viewpoint". It's no more interesting than puppet fascist Eric Gairy's tales of UFOs.

    Posted by fromredbird at 06/19/2006 @ 1:47pm

16. (Despite the Worst Thing In the World....Ignorance by FROMREDBIRD...I'll attempt to carry on, and answer his post)

    Funny . . . you're blank on the 1990's.

    Posted by FROMREDBIRD 06/19/2006 @ 1:47pm | ignore this person

    No, FROM, I'm not....and it was implicit in the rejection of "Old Democrat" and the creation of the "Third Way" by Clinton, that radical leftists like Ron Dellums and their "I like any dictatorship as long as it's got 'People's Republic' in the title" attitude, which was CREAMING the Democrats in the 70s and 80s...in the dustbin of history.

    No "Ron Dellums" Democrat EVER won the White House (Thank Whatever Belief System)...nor ever would. And the rejection of he and those like him saved the Dems in the early 90s.

    Nothing personally against Mr Dellums, he was a product of his time (the radical 60s) and he was certainly allowed to argue his position on the grandeur of Bishop's Grenada and Castro's Cuba....but nobody outside of a solidly liberal California district would buy it.

    That being said, domestically, he had some RATHER INTERESTING policies....for instance his support of an expansion of the San Fran Airport OVER the objections of environmentalists, his support of Lawrence Livermore Lab (continueing their radioactive experiments), and his support of a Big Pharma.

    On domestic policy, he seemed quite....how should we say...DLC, when it came to bringing home the bacon.

    Posted by Mask at 06/19/2006 @ 2:04pm