Ten.

Were you aware of that?

One in every five state Democratic Party organizations have already crashed that gate, often in defiance of the party brass. And, as we know only too well, in defiance of the national leadership.

Gee, what could possibly account for such a widespread, but wholly organic movement?

And imagine where it'd be if there were national Democratic leaders willing to take the reins.

"But, wait!" I hear you protesting. "Coming out for impeachment will be used against us. It'll hurt Dems at the polls!"

"But..." you'll hear me answer, "that's just a guess. You have nothing to point to that says you're right. Whereas, I have something to point to that says you're wrong."

But first, let's take a moment to congratulate the ten brave state Democratic Party organizations that have stepped up and brought impeachment out of the shadows:

Vermont
New Hampshire
Maine
North Carolina
Wisconsin
Nevada
New Mexico
Colorado
California
Hawaii

Not a bad collection, eh? Some Northeast, a little Midwest, some Southwest and Western, the Left Coast and Pacific... a nice mix.

Now, about that question of evidence. Everyone's heard the argument by now that impeachment has to be "off the table" because -- and here's where the "conventional wisdom" gets pulled out of a hat -- it will scare away "swing voters," and hurt Democratic candidates at the polls in November.

Aside from the fact that when you're sitting at below 30% approval, the "swing voters" are pretty much done "swinging," there's the small matter of empirical evidence for this proposition. That is, the total lack of it.

Sure, it feels like it should be true. After all, we've become conditioned to the idea that anything can and will be used against us. And we've all been on the wrong end of the "if you don't support Bush, you hate America" stick.

Not only that, but there's no clear (or at least undisputed) answer to the question of where American voters really stand on the issue. Depending on how the question is asked, there either is or isn't significant support for impeachment. Now, I'm no student of the polls, but has anybody seen one that asks not about whether or not impeachment is warranted, but rather how learning that a candidate would consider impeachment would effect voting preference? I haven't.

But I think what makes this theory so popular is, as I wrote in an earlier piece, that "it sounds vaguely sophisticated (because it's contrarian), and is untestable and therefore irrefutable, at least until it's too late."

The point of that piece, though, was that it's not untestable. And not only is it not untestable, it's already been tested. When? Where?

Nevada adopted it as part of their 2004 state party platform (pdf).

So what does that tell us? Well, that gives us a data point with which we can at least begin to address the concerns of those who worry about how the impeachment issue might affect Democratic candidates at the polls in November. Nevada Democrats have actually gone through an election cycle with impeachment as a part of their platform.

So what are the results?

Nevada's state legislature has a total of 63 seats: 42 in the House, and 21 in the Senate. The 2004 election results? A net gain of two seats for Democrats: +3 in the House, and -1 in the Senate. Not too bad.

How about federal candidates?

Well, it turns out that 2004 Democratic Congressional candidates outperformed (by percentage
of votes cast) the 2002 Democratic candidates in every district in the state.

NV-01
2002:
Shelley Berkley (D) 54%
Lynette Boggs McDonald (R) 43%

2004:
Shelley Berkley (D) 66%
Russ Mickelson (R) 31%

NV-02
2002:
Jim Gibbons (R) 74%
Travis Souza (D) 20%

2004:
Jim Gibbons (R) 67%
Angie Cochran (D) 27%

NV-03
2002:
Jon Porter (R) 56%
Dario Herrera (D) 37%

2004:
Jon Porter (R) 54%
Tom Gallagher (D) 40%

So that's something to consider. Yes, it's just one state, and just one election. And a presidential year versus a mid-term, too. But data is data. Anyone want to place a small wager on whether or not there were Nevada Dems wringing their hands in early '04, worrying that endorsing impeachment -- and this is pre-NSA, pre-Katrina, pre-McCain amendment nullifcation, and pre-DPW -- would cost their guys at the polls?

Does that prove that endorsing impeachment will help Democrats at the polls? No, although there's no shortage of people here who'd argue that it might. But what it does tend to prove is this: the unsupported assertion that impeachment will hurt Democrats at the polls is not only without foundation, but possibly complete bullshit.

And really, when you're banking the Constitution on your gut instinct, you're gonna want to steer clear of complete bullshit in your decision-making process.

So, that said, what's this really all about? Well, keeping in mind that state Democratic conventions have been the most fertile ground for these bold statements, I would urge all interested readers whose own conventions are upcoming to consider doing what they can to keep the ball rolling.

Who's got conventions coming up? I don't have an exhaustive list. (Though I exhausted myself trying to compile one. State Democratic Party web sites are, for the most part, in a shambles!) But I do know of these upcoming start dates:

Texas -- June 8
Delaware -- June 9
Minnesota -- June 9
Wisconsin -- June 9 (WI endorsed in their 2005 convention)
Iowa -- June 16
Idaho -- June 22
South Dakota -- June 23
North Carolina -- June 23 (NC endorsed in Executive Committee)
Nebraska -- August 18
Michigan -- August 26
Georgia -- September 9

If your state has a Democratic Party convention coming up and wasn't on this list, please let me know!

And if you're in one of these states and are a delegate to the convention, will be a delegate, know a delegate, or would be willing to wash and/or wax the car of a delegate in order to get him or her to listen to you for five minutes, it's time to start thinking about what you can do to get an impeachment resolution in front of your convention.

Impeachment activists include many with a wealth of convention experience, and several who participated in convention fights on this exact issue -- some successful, some not -- who can share their experiences and lessons learned with you. All you have to do is say you're interested. Draft resolution language is standing by, waiting for you.

So, who's got a convention coming up, and wants to make themselves nervous for three days on end?

Anyone?