The Executive Committee (EC) of the Chicago Democratic Socialists of America (CDSA) is a 23-person body. However, under the current bylaws, it will increase to 30 members over the next two years as our membership continues to grow (Article VI, Section 1, CDSA bylaws). This growing body is already larger than that of  any other DSA chapter in the country. For example, our comrades in New York City DSA, whose chapter is roughly four times the size of our own, has the largest executive body of any other DSA chapter (Article VI, NYC-DSA bylaws). Meanwhile, other chapters have substantially smaller bodies despite several having similar or larger membership than our own. Metro DC and Boston have 11 members, Portland has 14, and Los Angeles has only 9.

A proposal coming before the General Chapter Meeting (GCM) this March (see Figure 1) would take effect in June 2026, at the end of the current leadership’s term. It would limit the body to 11 members, a number much more in line with similarly situated chapters. The proposal achieves this reduction by removing most officer positions from the EC except the Treasurer, Secretary, Membership Engagement Coordinator, and the Co-Chairs. The proposal also removes branch representatives (currently numbering 15 but growing to a cap of 22) and adds 5 at-large members elected by the whole chapter and a representative from YDSA.

Why EC reform?

The EC is tasked with carrying out the will of the chapter, as expressed by our quarterly GCMs. However, in the months-long gaps between these meetings, the EC must lead the chapter both politically and administratively. Under these circumstances, it is crucial that our executive body is as representative and efficient as possible to meet the needs of its task of political leadership.

Efficiency

If CDSA seeks to realize the vision of maintaining an efficient executive body, the sheer size of the EC stands as an obstacle standing between us and that goal. Smaller bodies make decisions faster; it takes less time to debate and vote on proposals when there are fewer people in the room. Current EC members are aware of this; this is why CDSA has established and maintained a chapter Steering Committee (SC) as a subset of the EC to address less controversial proposals in a timely manner. If the SC did not exist, the EC would fail to fulfill its responsibilities within its current structure. As the EC is currently constructed, it is not uncommon for votes to pile up, resulting in days or even a week to clear a single proposal. This delay occurs, in large part, due to the logistics of coordinating 23 people with multiple roles in the chapter to debate and vote in a timely manner. In contrast, a smaller body whose members have only one major role could debate and vote on urgent votes much faster without the need for a chapter SC.

Consultation

A smaller body is easier to consult. If a resolution is proposed to the EC, members are highly encouraged to share the document with at least a few others on the EC to see if there is buy-in and find points of compromise to avoid debating a half dozen amendments. In a body of 23 to 30 members, this consultation process can be lengthy, and theoretically requires individual conversations with up to 11 other members to ensure the resolution is passable. Practically, this number can be even higher, since those who would oppose the resolution will often wish to be consulted ahead of time as a show of good faith. Shrinking the body from 23 to 30 members to 11 will encourage all members of the EC to consult on proposals as broadly as possible by making it feasible to speak to the whole body in a reasonable amount of time.

The Multi-Officer Problem

Currently, the EC is composed of a wide range of chapter officers, members of the geographic branch steering committees, and a representative from the Labor Branch and YDSA. As a result, every person on the EC is serving in at least one other crucial role in the chapter.

Officers 

Elected officers assume a substantial burden in managing their committees. If a member of CDSA has the expertise, time, and energy to invest in leading one of these offices, they may be deterred from doing so because it entails taking on the responsibilities of the office plus two monthly meetings for the EC and SC. By removing these officers from the EC, they are provided the necessary time and energy to focus on the work they were elected to do.

Branch Leaders

Branch leadership faces a similar problem. If a member is interested in helping organize agitprop or socials in their branch, they may consider running for their branch SC. However, as currently constructed, winning a seat on their branch SC means they are also seated on the EC. This paradigm erases opportunities for fledgling leaders to develop at their own pace by forcing them to take responsibility for the leadership of the entire chapter. Separating these offices introduces an important opportunity to develop a more robust middle layer of leadership in the form of branch leaders and officers providing the chapter with an incubator for future leadership.

Political Representation and Democracy

CDSA meets as a general body less frequently than other similarly-sized chapters. Other DSA chapters commonly have general meetings monthly or bimonthly, whereas CDSA only meets every three months. As a result, the EC often makes decisions about priorities, events, and projects between these meetings. The EC’s decisions are subject to reconsideration, but in practice the body makes many important political decisions for the chapter. Under these conditions it is especially important that the EC represents the political tendencies of the chapter.

Heightening Chapter Democracy 

A strong democratic culture requires structures which lead to votes with meaningful outcomes. The current EC structure is likely to lead to a continuation of CDSA’s history of non-competitive elections. Last June, only two of eight officer positions faced competitive elections (Secretary and Communications Coordinator). The West Cook branch did not have a competitive election for its EC representative; the South Side and North Side Red Line (NSRL) branches each had only one more candidate than seats, and the North Side Blue Line (NSBL) branch had two more candidates than seats.  In 2024, there were almost no competitive elections at all in the chapter (NSBL only filled one of eight steering committee seats and NSRL four of seven).

With the 2025 surge of leadership candidates and the Zohran membership bump, it is essential to encourage competitive elections going forward. Allowing the branch SCs to continue growing to maintain proportional representation on the EC would be a mistake. An 8-person NSBL steering committee is unlikely to produce a competitive election even as the branch surpasses 1,000 members. To avoid this problem without creating an EC which seats 30 members is to separate the branch steering committees from EC representation and fix the branch SCs at sizes that fit the needs, size, and activity of the branch in question. 

Additionally, lifting the burden of EC and SC duties from many of our chapter officers will reduce the workload expected of members elected to those offices. It follows that offices thus unburdened are more likely to attract candidates and help develop the chapter toward more competitive officer elections.

Political Representation Over Special Skills: The Problems of an Officer-Heavy EC

Talented organizers and competent administrators are ideal to sit on the EC; however, an officer-heavy EC often forces voters to choose between a skilled candidate who would make an excellent officer and a less-skilled candidate who will vote how a political faction would like on political decisions.

It is worth pointing out, again, that of the eight chapter officers currently sitting on the EC, only one of them was elected in a contested election. Under the current structure, the requirement of special skills or the manifold responsibilities of a chapter officer likely deters a broader field of candidates. What is certain is that these positions are not currently the product of internal political debate or representative of the chapter’s political tendencies. Seats are simply filled by anyone willing to take the job, regardless of their political opinions or priorities.

To further encourage accurate political representation in the EC, we decided to exclude branch representation from the base proposal. This decision springs from the same line of reasoning which inspired an earlier article on the role of branches in CDSA. The article argued that branches exist as infrastructure units of CDSA, not as political ones. The internal political interests of a CDSA member does not typically hinge on whether they live in Garfield Park, Rogers Park, Hyde Park, or Oak Park.

The resolution also proposes implementing the single transferable voting (STV) method to address the problem of political representation. By maximizing the number of at-large members elected by STV, the various interest groups that do exist in CDSA, such as caucuses, labor organizers, electoral organizers, or identity-based groups, will be able to internally organize around candidates that represent their interests and have an opportunity to win a spot at the table. In addition, this proposal would allow our members to freely vote for candidates that more closely fit their political orientation and support a system which encourages proportional representation.

Conclusion

According to DSA’s National Political Committee (NPC), CDSA had 2,621 members in January, an increase of over 100 from December, putting the chapter on track to reach its goal of 3,000 members before June (GDC Member Data Report). If we meet that goal and no change to the EC is made, we will begin elections for an approximately 30-member Executive Committee ahead of the June membership convention, including North Side Branch SCs of seven or eight members. We and our comrades across the chapter are bringing this proposal to the spring GCM because we believe that EC reform is sorely needed to ensure CDSA’s leadership body is representative of the internal political tendencies of the chapter without consuming 30 cadre organizers. We want a body that can operate decisively in a rapidly evolving external political situation. The chapter needs to reign in the size of this body now to ensure competitive elections, effective branches, and a functional EC in the coming term.