Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
America's Future Moves Forward
Every year in Washington, D.C., the Campaign for America's Future (CAF) convenes the largest conference of activists positioned anywhere to the left of wherever the center has drifted off to. Labor and community groups and civil rights groups play a big role, most of them strictly loyal to the Democratic Party. The focus is on domestic issues, and the approach is an inside strategy of nudging and honoring those in power. You can sense my cynicism, and yet this year I was very pleasantly surprised.
In past years the peace movement has protested, agitated, and self-organized, as the CAF has declined to include any panel discussions of war. It's been as if the conference planners had never heard of Iraq or Afghanistan, even while strategizing for elections and lamenting the lack of funds for non-military projects. Also in the past any panels on "accountability" have been extremely weak.
This year there was a panel on Afghanistan with four speakers, every one of them completely opposed to continuing the occupation. There was also a panel on excessive military spending at which three of the four panelists, including Congressman Barney Frank, proposed massive cuts in the military budget. And there was a panel on accountability at which all three speakers, including Congressman Jerrold Nadler, favored prosecuting torture and other crimes by high officials. Nadler stressed the extreme danger involved in not prosecuting such crimes, swore he would not be a rubber stamp for Obama as the Republicans had been for Bush, and declared that he would never be part of the first Congress to authorize preventive detention.
Each of these panels took place with several other panels occurring simultaneously in other rooms, but the plenary sessions that brought everyone together were encouraging as well. At a plenary on the Employee Free Choice Act, Senator Tom Harken said that if recalcitrant Democratic senators would not accept a reasonable compromise (and he spelled out what that meant) he would force a vote on the original bill and that one way or another it would pass. Larry Cohen of the Communications Workers of America urged everyone to demand of Democratic senators that they choose the side of working people over the Chamber of Commerce. "Which Side Are You On?" he shouted. "Some senators will say this is not the time because of the economy, but you cannot fix the economy without the Employee Free Choice Act: this is exactly the time!"
In a plenary on other economic issues, Robert Kuttner spoke first, with former progressive and current director of the vice president's task force on the middle class Jared Bernstein listening. Kuttner laid out everything wrong with the current trickle-down, give more money to Wall Street but not Main Street approach. And when Bernstein failed to address the criticisms, moderator Katrina Vanden Heuvel asked him again. He still didn't answer, but Kuttner and Vanden Heuvel had done an excellent job of amicably but directly presenting the case of the American people to a representative of those shipping our money off to the overclass.
Where the conference fell down was on another of its major focuses: healthcare reform. Just like Senator Baucus, the CAF refused to allow a single supporter of single-payer health coverage to take part in any of its plenaries, panels, or press conferences on healthcare. The approach of only asking for the inclusion of a "public option" is supposed to be strategic and smart, and yet the strongest means of winning that compromise would almost certainly be to push for single payer until forced to back off. It is also critical that we never agree to any ban on states enacting their own single-payer systems. But we can’t even raise that issue as long as mentioning single-payer is forbidden.
Until this year, the CAF's conference was always called "Take Back America." I never understood who had once had America or how they would take it back. Now the conference is called "America's Future Now." Many speakers claimed that "we" had taken America back and that putting Obama in the White House changed everything. Almost all proposals to lobby the government were framed as ways to "help Obama succeed" even if they were proposals to force Obama to do the exact opposite of what he clearly intends. All of this disturbed me, of course, but was what I had expected. Some of the big players, such as MoveOn.org for example, have completely dropped the pretense that they oppose wars (and of course only ever opposed Republican war supporters). But it is this corrupt partisan nature of the conference that makes its steps forward so stunning. Here is a group of people turning out in smaller numbers than in the past, because America has now been "taken back," and framing everything as a celebration of Obama. Here is a group of people that barely recognized the existence of Iraq in the past and, in fact, has yet to mention it. And yet here was a group of people coming out strongly against war and militarism precisely when their guy is now commander in chief. I think that speaks volumes.
So, three cheers to Robert Greenwald for putting together an excellent panel on Afghanistan and getting it into the program, and to Howard Dean for saying that single payer should have been included, and to Nadler and Frank and all the other participants in the panels that brought new life to a conference named with absurd exaggeration, but a conference that may perhaps have helped move a decent future a little bit closer to now.
- Posted in

9 Comments so far
Show All"Almost all proposals to lobby the government were framed as ways to "help Obama succeed" even if they were proposals to force Obama to do the exact opposite of what he clearly intends."
That's how it's been all along. Celebrate Obama as a great and wondrous visionary progressive, even as he enacts one rightwingish strategy and policy after another. How long this absurd ruse can go on will be a measure of how long Move On and its associate sell-outs continue hiding behind the banner of progressivism, or whatever they take to calling themselves. Once Obama has destroyed Afghanistan and made even more enemies abroad, will they still be heralding him as a modern day Lincoln? Yes, they will. They'll prove to be as stubbornly dug in to their caves of denial as Cheney.
Read American History textbooks, and you'll be told that FDR was responsible for a lot of progressive change. In fact, FDR wasn't responsible for much, but he was willing to be forced to do the right thing, given enough political pressure.
Obama shows signs of the same syndrome. He doesn't want to prosecute the torture policy mavens, but enough political pressure might make him do that. He doesn't want to implement a rational health care system, but enough political pressure might cause it to happen (in time). He doesn't want to be responsible for killing off the Detroit dinosaurs (even if that's the only way to make room for some REAL automotive innovation in the marketplace), but ...
Obama's no dedicated progressive, but at least he's not as genetically immune to logic (political or pure) as W was.
Howard Dean is saying he supports Single Payer NOW, but he opposed Single Payer when he was governor. Dean is the ultimate politician.
Why is it that events like this CAF gathering gets little or no mention in mainstream media news coverage, but when the conservatives hold their annual DC summit every utterance of Rush, Newt, and the other participants spawns all sorts of speculation about the stirring populist political dynamics that are sweeping the nation?
Bill from Saginaw
YAY!!! Another conference where everyone sits around and preaches to the choir and then congratulates themselves for being oh-so-enlightened. When are we going to realize that our government DOES NOT CARE?? Their ONLY concern is getting reelected and that means sucking up to the oligarchs that are really running the show. As long as we continue to keep thinking things can change if we can just get this guy into office, or Congress to pass that bill we're gonna keep getting screwed. I have no idea what the solution is but this ain't it! Good luck people- we really need it.
We will never have even a little hope of thoughtful, intelligent, humane, caring, etc, etc candidates until we eliminate the bought-and-paid-for methods we now have.
There must be a level playing field for all elections: equal money to spend, equal debate times and places, equal air and TV time, etc. Otherwise, we get whomever the money buys.
Candidates say what they think you want to hear, then reverse once they are in. You have noticed that, haven't you? Our only hope now is to gather our numbers to outspend the corporations and outvote them.
I am an artist, and in the community of artists there is an incredible amount of bitchyness and backstabbing especially when one of us makes some real progress in their career. So i have made a rule in my house, no tearing down the tribe, we are small and weak and divided enough as it is. And it has made a big difference in my small world. there is good will all around me, other people even notice it.
I want us to treat Obama the same way, in order to be effective.
Treat him like a deceptive whore... thats what we will get.
Treat him like a status quo beurocrat that's who will lead us.
Treat him like a brother and a revolutionary and a cunning anarchist and an artist....
That's what we need now... He keeps hinting to us, daring us...
"Make Me Do Your Will" We Need to MAKE him do it, and if we can pull that off in this culture of cognitive dissonance, That piece of MAGIC,
I know he will bend over backwards to do our bidding.
Xzorloc, why don't we all just be real quiet and nice to the new regime and maybe if we are good little boys and girls the GREAT OBAMAGOD will reward us with some milk and cookies.
Thanks for your suggestion but I think that I will continue to treat the President like the LYING, CHEATING SCUMBAG he is.
PS And if you honestly think that they way you treat him, actually has any baring on his actions, Try this treatment: Unless he comes clean and starts to work for WE THE PEOPLE, in three years, four months and twenty something days, we will vote for someone else who WILL.
Sorry, I don't share your cockeyed optimism or magical unrealism.
Especially when it's in service of an idea that boils down to "Gotta support the team!"
· Yr Obd't Servant